ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 27 ก.ย. 2021
- Axial flux motors are considered the ultimate future of electric vehicles and most importantly of electric aviation because they have a high torque-to-weight ratio, which is ideal for aircraft. Companies like Rolls Royce and Magnax have intense research and development in progress on these motors. Interestingly, the first-ever electrical generator, developed by the genius Michael Faraday, was an axial flux type. You can see the axis of rotation is parallel to flux lines. However, it never got its day in the sun back then.
We thank EMWorks for their FEA support. To know more about this powerful electromagnetic simulation software checkout : www.emworks.com/
Be our supporter or contributor: / @lesics
instagram : / sabinzmathew
Twitter : / sabinsmathew
Telegram : t.me/sabinmathew
FB : / sabinzmathew
Connect with me directly : stargram.in/j/lesics@conferen...
Private key : LES50864
Voice over artist : www.fiverr.com/voiceonthemove
As an electrical engineer by training, I find this an excellent video. However, as a pilot by profession, I was totally distracted by the propellor rotation in the wrong direction for forward travel.
They just needed to flip 2 wires though and it'd be fine =)
or change the propeller pitch angle
"If the wheel rotates faster than the frame rate, then the wheel will appear to spin backward instead of forwards. In each frame, the spokes have rotated and seem to be a few degrees behind the position it was at when the camera last imaged it. This is commonly known as the Reverse-Motion effect."
@@flybyw what ? its an animation dude...
@@whoswho6641 similar concept when the frame rate is relatively low and there is no motion blur
On todays episode of "A revolutionary new idea with seemingly no drawbacks which you will never hear about ever again"
This is the motor used to spin the record/playback head on video tape recorders, another drives the tape.
That's because they don't like to tell you the drawbacks. You won't see this again because the applications of it have many other issues that do not have a solution yet so thereby making this idea useless.
The drawback will most likely not be the motor, but the power supply. If they're trying to replace( or be an alternative) prop engines then they have a long way to go.
@@joshuasanford6934 Yep, A battery to power these motors for the average car would need to weigh 1 ton (imperial) to provide the energy equivalence of 10 gallons of gas (petroleum).
@@martyfrank on top of a huge power supply what are they going to do with the old/broken batteries. I'm sure some form of recycling could be used but I don't think that the insides of used up batteries could be recycled (I may be wrong), so the question is where would it go? I feel electric cars and planes are just not the way to go for the future, unless we somehow got a dyson sphere built in next hundred years or if we find a very efficient and clean way to get energy. As the waste of the batteries and the energy cost used to even get battery materials far out way the benefits of the electric vehicles we have today. Though with time and research the idea of all electric cars and now possibly planes could come to reality..... Though now terrorists could just use EMPs to disable everything if that happens. analog is the only way to not get affected by that, that's a whole other topic.
Another example would be many wind turbines use the same axial flux to generate power at low RPM due to the efficiency of having magnets on both sides of the coil in a Axial flux configuration.
My brains in a knot...you sure?
This is more about the differences between induction motors and EC motors. Most of the concepts presented apply to radial flux EC motors as well. The remark about large induction motors "sniffing up" huge currents at start-up is not only funny, it's also quite misleading. Motors are coupled to loads that often times have more inertia than the motor. The reduced inertia of the axial flux motor isn't what "keeps this issue under control". The motor controller is what limits start-up current. If we provide a controller (VFD or ASD) for the induction motor it too can start without that pesky sniffing up of huge currents.
Yeah, I was half asleep and that “sniffing up” bit snapped me awake. My impression here is that they’re ignoring Tesla and trying to make a wind turbine generator into a motor.
The problem being that when the magnets the torque goes dead?
Tesla always had the leading coil pulling the following coil.
I can imagine an array that staggers everything so there’s no cogging.
A friend built a wind turbine generator and the cogging was FIERCE.
Yeah, this video is trash, it sounds big and fancy, but these are literally just 3 / multi phase, compact brushless motors. They are already in use in things from drones, to power tools, to lawn mowers.
Is that why they need capacitors for start up ?
Why not offset the front and rear magnets so on start up they will pull towards the stator magnets in desired direction on start up.
Dear hot dog: as an electrical engineer I am happy to see you clarify the situation and dispel the inertia situation. Although the inertia of the load can vary drastically at start up, as you say mini loads are completely dominant as a fraction of the total inertia. As a designer of electronic controls for electromagnetic devices, I am in total agreement that it is the controller itself that brings the whole situation into a refined condition of Power and energy management. Without electron it controls, the faraday motor is massively complicated mechanically. Hence the dominance of the induction motor for Nearly a century.
I realise that every little helps, but surely the pitiful power density of the batteries is the limiting factor for aircraft?
People just don't like to talk about the actual problems and rather address things that already have solutions or resort to PROMISES instead of reality. That's especially sad here because otherwise the channel is so good.
Bingo. The motor itself is quite brilliant but does nothing about the fact it requires power to function. Power that even modern lithium-ion batteries aren't capable of supplying for long enough for higher energy aplications like aviation, shipping, and heavy industrial equpment.
For better or worse battery powered vehicles best use case is limited to small passenger cars, and small ultra light air craft. When scaled up to shipping trucks and commercial air craft it stops making sense to use battery power really fast as the expense and weight logistics take over.
@@mattb9343 Battery technology limits only a plane's range, not its size, since you can scale up the battery by the same factor as the rest of the plane. If small electric planes are economically viable for short range flights, there is no obvious reason why an up-scaled electrical plane shouldn't work for similar ranges. Same is true for other modes of transport: electric trucks, busses, and ferries already exist.
@@ehtuanK EDIT: misunderstood the comment. For short hop flights it wouldn't be viable to use larger aircraft. It's preferable to have more flights with less seats on smaller aircraft.
it's true, the gas for an efficient car to drive 400 miles weighs about 25kg, the battery of a tesla weighs about 500kg for about the same range. This is doable but expensive in a car, In a plane... forget about it. At least not for the foreseeable future unless some incredible breakthrough occurs.
I have not been this impressed since Rockwells' Retro encabulator.
the turbo-encabulator was more efficient though...
Hey, the retroencabulator would be absolutely nothing with out the panametric fan.
Yeah but this can't synchronize my cardinal ghrammetrs
I want a axial encabulator on my paralell energized polarized coil washer fluid
Wut
Thank you for the plain and clear expanation of the dynamics and function of these motors. The animations in union with the narration certainly cleared things up considerably. All the best Lesics.
What a fantastic demonstration. Great explanation on the concept of three phases. I would like to add, people have no idea how powerful shapes are. By simply changing the overall shape of the stator and rotor combination into a disc fashion rather than a traditional cylindrical fashion, you have shown how much more efficient it is.
Similar to how disc brakes and drum brakes are
It is not. The main advantage is weight. Not really big advantage for cars, but in aircrafts might save enough weight for extra passenger. Hobby RC motors have 90+% efficiency.
I remember when I first learned that electric motors appearing to operate so fluidly is just a lot of discrete actions done very fast. Blew my mind for a sec
It REALLY depends on the type of motor tho. The induction motors shown in this video are hooked up to 3-phase sine-wave that creates a constant magnetic field that is smoothly rotating. Cheap DC-motors found in toys are also contious. Its only these new-fangled* motors with fancy electronics controlling them that have discrete steps.
*I say new-fangled but these have been in existance since the 70's.
keep in mind that everything in the universe seems like it is moving smoothly but the base of interaction/information is quantized
Just wait until you hear about internal combustion engines
Still inferior to a nice piston prop. Will always be inferior. Why try to make everything electric? Electric planes and cars are outdated ideas
How quickly it is done.... amazingly
Trying to use the physics hand technique with this model is giving me cramps haha.
Oh no. Now that you mentioned it
are you referring to the right hand rule?
3rd foot rule
But hopefully only in your right hand...
You should probably get your girlfriend to help you out. Left handed is no good as a rule
Nicely done where a novice can understand (conceptually) the differences between the two types of motors. I wish I had such resources when I was in college trying to wrap my brain around electromagnetism and other physics topics
Once opened a lego dc brushed motor from the late 90's - early 2000 (first rcx lego mindstorms had the same motor). I noticed that is was very efficient also as generator, moving another motor connected to it easy. Also showing a very high efficiency. It had axial magnets just like this. The old floppy drives work in the same manner without brushes.
Awesome Video. Just stunning work. The amount of detail and information is incredible. Great work!
Seeing this Working principle animation reminded me of BLDC Motor Animation made by Learn Engineering 5 years ago.
Two for the price of one 😁😉
Aren't they same thing?
It's the same channel, they changed the name some time ago
The only difference is the form factor. Doesn't matter if radial or axial, the principles are the same.
So why do we need a custom motor when off the self solutions do the same thing?
Amazing job, great production! First video I've seen on this channel and I'm subbed.
I remember reading about this type of motor in 1992 and wondering why it wasn't in use back then. Yet here we are today. I had a gut feeling this would come back. Also with new materials like carbon fiber and titanium, I imagine better turbine engines used as generators. Open field today.
The animation quality has greatly increased. Good work.
Mercedes Benz just Bought YASA which designs and manufactures Axial Flux motors.
And they also said that they will use it for High performance all electric AMG EQ variants
This move will push Axial Flux motors into the mainstream.
Cool
Teslas patent of 1889 for the Axial Motor already made it "mainstream" more than 130 yrs ago, but ok. Seems as though Yasa just outright stole the Idea and claimed it for themselves along with Mercedes and Rolls.
@@lastofthebest5102 this is not Teslas motor you bimbo.
Mercedes buying Yasa means the technology is dead now.
@@lastofthebest5102 Patents typically last for 25 yrs, not forever.
YASA's tech is based on the Axial design, with improvements.
"Standing on the shoulders of giants" comes to mind.
Thank for sharing the explanation behind these type of electric motors!
4:11 current always ramps as shown due to the effect of inductance. The slope is determined by the inductance of the coil and the voltage. No matter how much voltage you use, it will be a ramp.
My final year project was to build an axial flux 3 phase induction motor in 1994. I learned a lot about motors that year.
Your Animations always helps to imagine in a very much better way and motivate me to learn physics regularly
"in a very much better way". May want to learn English as well.
@@lastofthebest5102 You should type "You may"...
;)
@@lastofthebest5102 I am not a English Grammer Expert and I don't need to be. Someone understand what I am saying that's ok
@@lastofthebest5102 You may want to learn some manners and not be a jerk.
@@greenatom - really. That excrement gets antiquated.
"Did you understand what Sudeept was communicating?" (yes/no)
Yes.
Then shut up.
I wrote a report about this type of motor in high school and got laughed at by my teacher. It was 1994 and I wrote about it being more efficient. I was heart broken. He said opposing fields bla bla bla. It really did mess me up a little...
bad teachers are the worst, sorry you had to live under that shadow
@@swingtag1041 Seeking strength in numbers is a smart strategy, and being smart is a quality I like in teachers. Plenty of great teachers in Europe, for example, where unions are just by default. Of course, there are good teachers and bad teachers everywhere. It's a little silly to just pick an orthogonal political issue and pretend it to be the cause for any of them.
In 1982 a General Motors representative came to our science class and talked about electric cars, I suggested that they make some sort of system that makes power while the car is rolling. He laughed at me.
@@swingtag1041 I'm not arguing with that, really. The school system has a lot of issues. But even if that's the most common answer you got, you still made two logical jumps in your reasoning. The first is assuming that a poorly functioning school system is just because of an abundance of bad teachers, when in reality, there are many factors. The second is equating bad teachers to weakness, to unions, which is just a non sequitur.
@@swingtag1041 We know why US schools don't actually teach, and it's not unions, it's standardized tests. Basing the public school system off of fascist military schools didn't help either
I didn't recognize them at first but suddenly I realized I've seen these before inside of floppy drives that I took apart when I was a kid!!
Great video, subscribed!
I love the presentation. It was very pleasant and easy (even for me) to understand. Thank you.
Outstanding! Clearly explained advantages. Easily defined control by a microprocessor. Amazing that technology takes an old idea and makes it the most desirable solution for today's propulsion systems.
Helpful video, thank you! It's been hard to find any other decent explanation of how an axial flux motor works.
amazing video, very well explained and very high production quality
Great videos, I have watched all of them.👍
I've seen this motor design used in some1980's top of the line cassette decks for the capstan motor
Yes and also on VCR drum motors
Thanks for this informative video. The animations were very clear. I learned something on YT.
Super in-depth. This was just what I needed to understand
They use axial flux generators on smaller wind turbines too to eliminate the need for a gearbox as shown in Homebrew Windpower by Bartmann and Fink. The generator shown is much like this, though laminated iron cores aren't used. Though it lowers output, it eliminates cogging resonance, which increases life of the blades and other parts.
Looks cool, but except the magnets and coils orientation, how is it different from a regular brushless motor? How is it more efficient and powerful than them?
This ^
As far as I understood, more of the magnetic flux lines are actually in use than with the traditional design.
The torque per weight is better since more of the material is reciving magnetic flux at any time. The rest of the numbers is either meh or missing to be honest.
it uses Silicon carbide transistor instead of Mosfet, it capables of operating on higher frequencies and higher voltage than mosfet, ...and for same power rating like brushless it requires only 1/3 of brushless size, because the copper needed is way fewer, I see the real engine, and the shape of the stator is similar to a sheet of PCB with copper in it also without iron...so it is cheaper to go wider for this engine, therefore the torque also getting bigger, because of radius....if you need speed then gearbox will do the job
@@MiTheMer But they are not comparing it to the BLDC motor for example, which they've shown in another video. They are compraing it to a rotating flux motor. The principal looks exactly the same, and I'm not sure how is the performance of this motor is so much significantly better.
Thank you for teaching us about axial flux motors.
Been subscribed for a few years keep up the great inovation
From my understanding, when comparing the flux lines on FEA, the axial flux motor should be simulated along the Magnets array direction (like a linear motor), where the non-interactive flux lines should also been seen in axial flux motor. Feel free to correct me. From your simulation results in 5:05, the results on Axial-flux motor didn't show the return path of the flux.
Its the weight of batteries that makes electric aviation a non-starter, not the torque to weight ration of the motors - even common electic motors already have a relatively high torque to weight ratio.
Exactly… this video is good so far imho, but the problem of electryfing any Aircraft is the weight of the battery caused by bad energy density.
Would higher efficiency flux/phase modulation and/or shorter duration inputs help power usage? Less power usage seems to be the natural progression if possible.
I think they're talking about little Cessnas and sea planes, not transatlantic jumbo jets
but yeah, it wouldn't be viable for long trips due to the rocket equation
OTOH batteries are getting better all the time. Electric aviation is no longer a complete non-starter, it's just not going to replace jumbo jets any time soon. It's already feasible to use them in short range applications, like commuter flights.
A six passenger commercial plane is already in operation, and pretty much every major airline is committed to developing electric airplanes.
The benefits of electric are also clear - the cost of electricity is about 1/20th the cost of jet fuel for the same distance flight.
Though fuel is a huge weight factor in fuel engines.
As a professor in the field of electrical machines, who has been engaged in axial machines since 1994, I will say that with the same volume of electrical steel, axial machines have 2 times less power due to the uneven magnetic saturation.
Well!
Now I know.
A billion percent more than I previously knew of axial motors.
Really interesting video, particularly because I knew little to nothing of them prior.
I’d like to see these applied to a 4x4 truck.
I tried to do this 15 years ago with a bike wheel... can you imagine the torque 😁
Absolutely clear animation and explanation! Honestly, I had completely forgotten about Axial flux electric motors; thank you very much for reminding the value of old gold.
Thanks Ranbir sir😊. These motors seem to be the new engine for airplanes.
@@getartsywithyogita8291 Thank you very much, Ms. Gaddam. Truly admirable work You and your team are doing. I am forwarding this channel to old engineers; let's see if they subscribe.
Wish you all great success.
Best explanations is on this channel! Thank you very much!
At 5:23 the diameter discussion ignores that at surface permanent magnet outer-rotor radial flux motor (model aircraft people call them "outrunner") design achieves the same large working diameter for a given motor outer diameter as an axial-flux design.
I'm gonna tell you this, if you resolve the battery problem, everything else comes second.
Except that's unlikely to happen. Some improvements - 2x, 3x current energy densities - sure. But not much more than that. The materials are getting increasingly unstable and prone to combust/explode at smallest provocation. You just can't squeeze as much energy in so small volume without limits.
@@sharpfang you say that like that's not true for jet fuel as well...
@@kevinbissinger The problem is gasoline by itself is completely inert, no energy to be extracted, next to zero energy density. It needs oxygen from the air for combustion, mixed with it immediately before combustion, and only the gasoline-oxygen mix has that high energy density you see commonly listed as "energy density of gasoline". If you were trying to store oxygen-gasoline mix in car tanks, you'd have cars exploding left and right.And while for extracting electric power out of chemical batteries you could keep separate substrates and only connect them to react in small amounts as you're drawing that electric power - a concept commonly known as fuel cell - there's no practical way to split the product into the original substrates - either it's unreasonably complex, requiring a refinery-sized infrastructure, or too costly energetically, the process consuming several times as much energy as it can produce, or just not technologically viable, be it too dangerous, too polluting with toxic byproducts, or the products are just impractical to store (say, water vapor from hydrogen+oxygen).
Simply put, a practical reversible fuel cell is not even on the horizon, and classic rechargeable batteries just can't handle these energy densities.
@@sharpfang You describe the current state of affairs adequately. Then you jump to the absurd conclusion that somehow this current state is near the optimum we can reach when there a advances in material science, proof-of-concept batteries which already put your projection to shame coming out every few weeks. Maybe inform yourself or stick to talking about minecraft or you will look about as smart as the people who called automobiles "devil wagons" in a few years.
@@sharpfang - How can that possibly be an issue for cars? Tesla and Lucid both just introduced long range models capable of 520 miles per charge. Even if they increase energy density by only 50% you have EV's going a lot further on a single charge than most ICE vehicles can on on a tank of gas. Also, the materials are not getting increasingly unstable and are not as prone to combust/explode as they were even 5 years ago. They're actually getting much safer. LiFePo and new low cobalt Li-ion are much more resistant to burning. Toyota's new Solid State Li-ion battery won't burn at all. Besides Li-ion batteries don't burn anywhere near as quickly as gasoline and they don't explode with anywhere near the force that a tank of gasoline will. Don't forget that while there may be roughly 132,000 BTU's of energy in a gallon of gasoline there are no IC Engines that can extract more than perhaps 25%-30% of that energy. Seven of every 10 gallons of gasoline you buy are simply wasted in an ICE. So the reality is that that gallon of gasoline is only providing about 39,000 BTU's (10-11 kWh) of useful energy. Consider as well that while an IC Engine can't extract all the energy in gasoline, a fire can. A 20 gallon tank of gasoline holds 2,640,000 BTU's (774,000 kWh) of explosive energy while a typical EV battery pack hold's only 64,000 kWh. Perspective is important.
These have been around for a while. The complexity, high manufacturing cost and difficulty, difficulty with cooling reducing efficiency, and just the overall design mean that its very hard to make a commercially viable version of these motors, especially when many other motors out there are easy to produce and can be just as fit for purpose
Technology isn't static though. As with all technologies, time, experience, R&D, etc. lead to improvements that overcome the challenges and limitations. And we'd probably be light years ahead of current-state development in these kinds of motors if the fossil fuel industry and internal combustion engines hadn't taken over the world.
@@ronaldjanert7456 As the technology matures, we will begin to see specialization. Currently Tesla's new PMSR motor design is a huge leap forward in the automotive transportation sector.
Daniel, thanks for answering the question that was in my mind; "If axial flux motors are so much better, then why haven't they been in use for all applications?" Now I know. 😏👍
@@dustinyoung3069 do you think Tesla is actively developing a PMSR Axial motor?
@@jamescoppe They might have been, 2 years ago. I have no idea what they're doing now.
I love that you used the Nemesis for your animation!
I`m astonished how good are your videos. Big thumbs up :)
I remember reading about Citroen putting these in cars some 30 years ago , they were trying out using one alongside the flywheel of a conventional engine instead of an alternator and starter motor set up , it worked so well that it could be used to power the car with the engine turned off
Exactly and that's why big oil shut it down. Just imagine what and where we could be without human greed!
@@ashleyfletcher2543 lol
With Citroen's active suspension, electric motor advancements and god knows what else those guys concocted in their R&D dept those guys were impressive. I see they're still innovating but it's a mystery why they didn't do a Tesla before Elon did it. Maybe a big, established company is too afraid to take such risks.
@@Cyba_IT no mystery, the cause of the emergence of electric cars is politic. Before the Tesla you had the EV1 from GM. Tesla was not a precursor, it just got the good timing with california rules and a sense of hype that the EV1 did not have.
And also thanks to the mobile phone and mobile computer tech, batteries tech has improved since EV1 era.
@@jeanmartin963 you know that GM killed the EV1 for political reasons, dont you?
I think in this design the rotor has a larger diameter compared to radial motors. So at high RPM the centrifugal forces become larger and maximum RPM will be lower compared to the radial type. In EVs you will need a different transmission to reach the same speeds as with the radial type. Tesla's motors have max RPM of around 20,000 with a step down gear ratio of 9:1. So at top speed it would be 20,000 / 9 = 2222 RPM at the wheels. If the axial flux motor has a max RPM of 13,000, then it would need a 13,000/2222 = 5.8 :1 gear ratio to reach the same speed. This would also mean you only get 5.8 times torque increase instead of 9 times.
You would maybe save weight at the motor and at the transmission with the axial flux motor, but I'm not so sure if you would get the same torque at the end.
and to get the same torque, the weight(would nearly become equal to radial) would increase so would the complexities... So, still not plausible for EVs I guess....
But aren't the axial motors designed to give more torque than radial?
@@utsavdhyani8839 yes axial nominal torque is higher than asynchronous motor
You could probably just put multiple of them on the same output shaft until their total weight is equal to that of a radial motor. Since they have higher torque densities, they will be able to produce enough torque that they wouldn't need very high of a gear reduction at all.
No, axial motors have higher torque due to their larger diameter, so they would need less gear reduction, in the end you'd get the same or even higher torque
@@utsavdhyani8839 I've read both Lightyear One and Aptera will be using axial flux motors. Aptera seems to be using no gearing at all, and still gets same acceleration as many non-Plaid Tesla models. Although there are many factors besides the motors as well..
Damn! I came here to remark upon the fact that the two spurving bearings were in a direct line with the panametric fan but have been beaten to the punch. Bravo!
Spectacular, reminds of of the innovative turbo encabulator
You're comparing apples to oranges - asynchronous AC (induction) motor to axial brushless DC. It would be more useful to explain how it is better than the closest relative, radial brushless DC, which uses the same principles, but geometry is different (radial vs. axial)
I wonder if it might be possible to combine both types of dc motors.
Axial on the outside to provide the lightweight torque and radial in the center hub for starting power and power surge requirements.
@@jeremytaylor3532 some designs coming that do this.
@@jeremytaylor3532 was thinking you may need a center radial for regenerative breaking anyway.
Please check out this video.
m.th-cam.com/video/detrCRPmzV8/w-d-xo.html
It is indeed possible to not only combine axial flux and radial flux, but also in-runner and out-runner in BLDC motor. This motor gives 4 directional flux and hence is known as 4D motor.
My 1994 textbook covers the detailed design of axial flux motors. After having worked on them as well as on more common radial flux motors, they have disadvantages that do not exist in radial flux motors. As a result, they will only ever appear in specialized applications. Even HDD spindle motors are radial flux and you would think that given how thin HDDs are, axial flux motors would be a natural fit, but they are not.
I am long time fan of your book on BPM motors! It has been a reference for 20+ years and something that I ask anyone that wants to design motors to read before any trial (I have been working in BPM design in the last 30 years, mostly for refrigeration compressors an washing machines).
I completely agree with you, axial BPM motors have problems hard to overcome and no benefits except on very special cases. Despite of it, time to time someone tries to bring it as a "revolutionary" solution even in applications where it is clear that they are not even a serious contender. Every time I see any respectable company spending resources on it for conventional applications I start to ask myself if they know something special or if it is just another case of a company that has no employee or good consultants for doing the homework (for decades the second case is by far the most common...)
The bullshit we see around when the subject is electric motor design is something that really amazes me.
What sort of disadvantages do they have?
@@thomasburkhart5078 one is heat removal. In conventional motors, most of the heat is generated in the coils and stator core, and both structures are in the external part of the motor, where simple heat extraction is easy to implement. Other is making the rotor and stator parts strong enough so the huge atraction forces don't cause flexions in the rotor parts. There are a few others problems due to manufacturing techniques, but those are harder to explain in not technical terms.
All these problems have solutions, but solutions that come at a price tag and mass/volume increase that, in an apples to apples fair comparison, make them much less "revolutionary" than people promoting them tell us.
you can easily reverse the axial motor so that the part the heats up is on the outside
@@ldokonal1969 _"one (problem) is heat removal."_ - Especially if the motor is in a wheel hub. There is (now) a liquid magnetic oil which helps greatly to redistribute heat to the outside of the motor - however there's less viscous shear area to an equivalent radial flux motor. Heat removal will always be the largest problem.
Excellent piece on Axial Flux motors vs standard radial flux motor.
Great presentation. How does the axial motor compare with the radial flux motor for back EMF generation? Second, can single rotor axial flux motor "lock up " if stopped with the magnets perfectly aligned? Are multiple offset rotor magnet discs required to prevent this from occurring?
Thanks.
We’ve been using these on electric radio controlled models for decades - allowed us to get high torque at lower prop speeds and therefore no gearbox required
.
And whose motors are those? We've been using radial flux brushless outrunners for a few years. For "decades" we were using brushed can motors. Then brushless inrunners, then outrunners added to the mix.
@@gertnood You’re right, it was more like a little over a decade.
Hey @Andy!! Do you know anyone selling or making small versions of these axial flux motors?
@@TheForwardThinker I’ve been out of the hobby for years now…
they work especially great as generators, since short cirquiting one of those cables makes it near impossible to move it.
@cyber hacker, please explain what you mean, I'm not very technical. Move what?. Not being a smart a$$ just want to know! 👍
@@bigcheeezzz7135 Move the shaft when the coils are shorted.
Thanks for this awesome informative video!!!
Great video, you are a natural teacher.
Placing axial motors in the wheel massively increases unsprung weight, but may double as brakes if they were so engineered. Also of course acting as regenerative systems under braking. Interesting!
yes they most certainly would need to be located within the vehicle. Nothing a beefy CV joint cant fix.
I've been dreaming about a hybrid rotary/electric motor.
Seems like the Wankel is so close to an electric in design and physics.
Imagine the rotary's rotor spinning in an electromagnetic field.
The gas and electric systems are one and friction is possibly zero.
This could eliminate Apex seal wear which is the weak point of the rotary design.
This also eliminates the four hub motors at each wheel allowing a normal drive,reducing weight,complexity and exposure to shock and water.
When I see the hollow center of the axial motor and the method of generating spin it seems like it would work.
Friction would still be an issue, to keep a seal with the engine case. And it might even rely on apex seals more...
Or do I just not understand properly?
Either way, it sounds like a fantastic idea for a generator, if you get it to work.
Bro, that is an amazing idea. These hybrid Wankel engines could be used on airplanes, or futuristic Mazdas. ;) I hope you can work on this. Are you an aspiring engineer?
Note: The heat produced by combustion may shorten the lifespan of the electrical components of the motor/generator as the combustion occurs near the electronics. :)
@@thatguyalex2835 I'm more scientist than engineer. Loved rotaries back in the day but poor mpg and short engine life were it's downfall.
The feeling of the Mazda was close to the electric slotcars and two stroke dirt bikes I grew up on.
Just had the idea a couple days ago.
Heat would definitely be a concern.
My idea was a cast iron magnetized rotor and the magnets and copper windings in the case protected by the water cooling.
Combustion would be brief. Mostly on starts,hills and when recharging the electric systems.
With the combined motor and low weight of a rotary plus good charging power less batteries will be required further reducing weight.
Don't know who to talk to maybe the local Mazda dealership.
@@Fightre_Flighte I was hoping that if the field spins properly the rotor would float and redirect before it ever goes metal to metal.
Should run cold since it'll only use gas on starts,hills and recharging and the cooling system water should have plenty of time to cool down.
Thanks for both of these comments.
I might go talk to the Mazda dealership today.
@@jeffarcher400 That sounds like a great idea. They might take your idea, so you might want to discuss copyright. Unless, you are open to sharing idea with Mazda. :)
Thanks for this excellent post.
Thanks, great explanation.
Looks like a good candidate for in home elevators for the old and disabled. Coupled to a screw jack and some lithium batteries you have a "power cut" (Brownout/blackout) resilient means of going upstairs and downstairs.
Or use the motor in a more traditional elevator system for the elderly, and have a series of cables pull the elevator from the top, and a counterweight. The screw jack may develop a lot of friction if not oiled properly. :)
I have not been this impressed since Rockwells' Retro encabulator.
Comparing an asynchronous electric motor with a permanent induced one is like comparing apples with pears. It would have made more sense to compare this axial permanent induced motor with the radial one. But then it would become very clear that the difference between them is not that big.
the problem is this design sucks, as it is not taking advantage of any of the advantages that can be achieved with this type system,
@@denispalmer1937 What are the disadvantages versus the advantages, in a more advantageous design?
@@zAvAvAz THE disadvantages of the shown design are heat produced larger size and weight, lower torque and power but add more expensive to build, limited applications,
the advantages of the updated ( from my patents from the 80s, new patents higher efficiency 99% plus, little to no heat produced, able to position and hold not just rotate, so efficient a 1.5 volt pen lite battery will run a motor with a 300 lb rotor for hours, just to name a few, cost to build, no emi , we have measured outputs to 9 hp with a dyno, and at this time the power in was 900 watts, simply put, the new is beyond these like the difference between a water wheel and a turbine, the new design is so efficient ( no heat produced, in a stalled condition under full applied power for over a hour never got warm ( no cooling required, ) but never lowered torque applied and as soon as the load was lowered to where it could turn it turned, motor and generator, at the same time and as a generator has a perfect 1.0 power factor and no measurable distortion, and emi. . these motors can be plastic molded and our 3 ft diameter one has the capability of over 22000 lbs ft torque, with 60 volts applied and these motors have no inrush current requirements, a motor that has a maximum out put at 20 amps max RPM , at stall used .2 amps, should I go on,
@@denispalmer1937 - sounds awesome, where do I find out more about the motors you are referring to? Are they available for purchase? how about using them as generators for a small wind turbine?
@@denispalmer1937 This is fantastic news. i see the formula i made for lockheed and boeing being fulfilled. We shall make great uses of the new engineering for our coming golden age neighbor. Please write me a pm. Heaven is approaching.
This looks so obvious! Brilliant! So compact. Are the coils easier to wind?
I am not very technical, but could the permanent magnets be exchanged for electro-magnets? Thus the attraction and repulsion could be controlled.
Very well explained thank you.
This type of motor was invented 50 years ago after almost all Japanese cassette decks have built-in miniature motors for fast rewinding of the tape, and the speed of rotation is monitored by feedback based on Hall's magnetic sensors.
Can you donate some of IQ to me
Weight to weight comparison to hp and torque would be nice.
Does an axial require a cast housing or will composites be sufficient?
If radius=power then at what minimum range does an axial become neutral?
I.E. 55kw vs 250kw.
I think that water cooling will be mandatory for good power to weight - they stated 96% efficiency, with a 55kW mechanical that's 2.3kW waste heat, at 250kW it's 10.4kW.
At some point you're probably limited by the maximum frequency the wires can carry vs amps it can push.
@@akkudakkupl Modern general aviation engines like the Continental IO-550 produce 310HP (~230 kW) with just air cooling. Being a combustion engine, their efficiency is < 40%. This means they are dealing with dumping nearly 340 kW of heat. 10.4kW should be much easier to deal with.
And what about cooling and the weight of the cooling system?
Oh. akkudakkupi mentioned this
Thanks for sharing!!
Superb explanation !!! Well done !!
Am I the only one that realizes that you are comparing an AC motor to a DC motor? A squirrel cage induction motor is an AC motor that works because of the rotating magnetic field crossing the induction bars and the Axial flux motor is basically just a brushless DC motor. Two totally different things with two totally different principles.
I don't know...but it appears most of the advantages come from the larger radius of the design. A radial motor can match an AF motor in efficiency if given a larger radius. I think a radial flux motor that almost looks like axial flux motor are those from wind turbines without a gearbox.
Thanks for the video
Tthank you for this excellent explanation. Kind Regards.
So this is like the pancake motors on the HO scale race cars we had 50 years ago. Only difference is they had brushes to switch the coil polarities rather than fancy electronics.
you'd have to see how the motor was wound. Brushes indicate a wound rotor and a fixed field
@@JackpineGandy You are correct. In the case of the micro-pancake motors of old, the rotor was wound and the field were permanent magnets.... but then, this was 1950's toy technology.
@@markfabre7682 these axial flux motors are a whole 'nother animal, and they are absolutely dependent upon the computer to make them work. There is a variation also in the skunk works, using a wound field on the rotor instead of permanent magnets. It will use an induction setup to power the field on the rotor instead of permanent magnets because of the perceived shortage or expense of the rare earth minerals need for the magnets. The windings can be aluminum wire instead of copper, so no expensive copper is needed.
brushes will wear out, electronics wont
@@RelianceIndustriesLtd electronics routinely fail in multiple ways
It has to be said that the conventional induction motor is no slacker when it comes to efficiency. But yes. It seems that the axial flux motor is better.
The problem, especially for aircraft, remains the weight of the battery.
The newer latest types of batteries in full development with 35% added Supercapacitors with new Aluminum-ion cells + new more efficient chemical mixtures compound based on Na sulphur +Fe and with a molecular structure of Graphene will allow the new batteries not just to charge faster, last longer between charges and discharge slower but also will have a reduced overall weight meaning it could be used for aircrafts as well.. ;0)
@@poplaurentiu4148 Ive been hearing this for years and years, when I'm looking for something I want right now I don't really care that in ten years it will be better, I want it to be better now, this sort of talk is bandied about like shuttlecocks in a game of badminton in ev culture, always seems to either come to nothing or achieve about half as good results as initially claimed, it's a new trend these days saying things will get better in the future, just shows how bad things are today really
@@Markcain268 If you afford right now get any of these cars that are produced this year 2021 after October : Tesla S/3/Y/X performance, Jaguar i-Pace, Rivian R1T, GMC Hummer ev, Lucid, XPeng P7 Performance all these are getting equipped with latest graphene battery with up to 35% added Supercapacitors..
@@poplaurentiu4148 I prefer super unleaded in my car, pity they don't sell the old 5 star 101 octane leaded fuel anymore, my old rover V8 ran beautifully on that, wish I still had it!
Very neat and concise explanation 👍
thx for the great vid .
The part I'm having trouble with is, there are six coils and six magnet poles shown. They all line up at the same time. This seems like a single phase arrangement, to me. Yet, it's being used with a three phase input. Help please.
The first set of magnets can be phase a and b, the second phase a and c the third set phase b and c. The key is the controller allowing the rectified voltage at the right time and right polarity. The controller doesn't care if it's fed with single or three phase, just fire the scr's at the right time into the right magnets.
So given that the rare earth elements needed for permanent magnets are rare and expensive, could you use electro magnets on the rotor?
Also could you sandwich a rotor between two stators as it seems the permanent magnets are only 'half' used?
You are right. This video is simplified.
The advantage of axial flux is shortening the distance where the flux isn't used. In a radial configuration it has to travel around the outside. As you have spotted, with axial flux it only needs to hop across the ends with as many rotor / stator layers stacked in between.
As for energised rotor, I think you get higher flux density and flux per weight from a rare earth magnet than from normal coils.... Superconductors would change the game significantly.
“the permanent magnets are only 'half' used” - en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halbach_array
Even better, could we use these motors on container ships, and use a methanol/ethanol fuel cell to power the motors, and an array of sodium-ion (yes, those exist, but are not very common) batteries and solar panels as backup power? Diesel needs to slowly be phased out. Lol...
No, it's not given. Rare earth elements are not as rare as the name suggests. There's plenty available for the next few hundred years. Also, they are recyclable.
@@dougaltolan3017 japan is using superconductors in their new magnetic train. It uses additional electricity to cool the material on board of the train
Great explanation. Thanks
Fantastic graphics and explanation 💯
A better solution overall, but you can still tell how much room their is for improvement given the tangential force vectors and overlapping wave forms (But hey, 96% is still pretty incredible). It's amazing that centuries later we're still perfecting something so conceptually simple yet essential to the modern world. I'm very curious to see where we'll be in even a few decades. We'll be miles ahead soon with the money being pored into it.
Are the brushless motors used in FPV drones/ RC plane this type?
I wonder this also.
Pretty sure they are, yeah. Though the magnets are usually arranged just outside the coil perimeter instead of toward the face of the coil assembly. But the windings change orientation to suit.
Love the vid!
Amazing explanation
Great video
Problem with batteries in an aircraft is weight. An aircraft using fuel will get lighter and more efficient as the fuel load is used up. With batteries, you are hauling the same mass from takeoff to landing.
The lamination orientation of the stator core can be expensive I think.
And it doesn't need sinusoidal input?
No.
A good axial flux motor dont use laminated steel.
It's basically a pancake shaped BLDC but the change in shape makes perfect sense and really seems to do the trick. Awesome :D
Thanks for the explanation! Regards from Spain :)
The whole world seems to be constructed only out of pluses and minuses and still it's so complicated
They all equal 0 though
@@eclipse369. That's very deep.
@@eclipse369. I disagree in a kind hearted way. If the "big bang" was just pluses and minuses that added to zero, then we wouldn't be sitting here confused in the comments section of nerd videos. Yes to the pluses and minuses of quantized energy, but it's just way more complex than our current guesses. Do you ever watch PBS Space Time or Sabine Hossenfelder? Our model of the everything is flawed. Germs growing in a jar don't get my level of things. We are just bigger more complex germs in a cosmic bottle. (I may have over replied to your comment.)
@@ToxicityAssured Actually the "Big Bang" was also supposed to be the same amount of pluses(Matter) and minuses(anti-matter) which were supposed to zero out themselves(collide and turn into energy). But it didn't. where did the minuses(antimatter) go? we still have no clear idea but som hypothesis some of which seems too far-fetched.
So yeah I agree with the last statement "we just germs in a cosmic bottle" and despite being such germs most of us overestimate ourselves.
@@ToxicityAssured entropy
One question I have is how does this motor scale in size? Does the diameter get wider or does it get deeper as the coils get thicker. I'm sure both happen, but which is the dominant direction.
That's the same question I got
The easiest thing is to just add more layers
as with most engine's, if u want to build them up u keep relative proportions. if u want more output make it bigger in all directions and adjust the gearing to get the speed and torque u want.
but as u have seen the best way to use these motors is as a direct drive. this means u need to fine a balans between torque and sen-tripedal forces.
this is very limited tho.
that is why i see them cluster the motors.
if u offset the pols u can make them run smoother and have a smoother power draw spikes.
also in start up u can just use 1 to limit the in rush current.
the drawback is u need 2 or more frequencies controllers witch makes it expensive.
You can also grow them along the rotational axis by adding more discs.
You have more than one question. I would suggest that the Power to Weight ratio applies. They stated that torque increases with size of radius. Power as in used power will increase with thickness. Efficiency of the motor give the results. One over another. So size will in fact be regulated by the use requirement.
It is stated it is a lighter motor and more efficient. Direction of the motor will be determined by how it is set up by electronics and design for purpose.
Stunning animations!
Wow. Electric motor for the plane. Revolutionary. I don't know about anyone else, but I am looking forward to flying from New York to London in just 30 hours.
I like this design, and I believe the power output can be doubled without having to increase the current usage. The concept is simple and it works. I already built a proof of concept that shows it's possible.
Most electric motors are pretty efficient. Since the maximum outputpower is determined by the inputpower this motordesign wont be able to even nearly double the outputpower compared to other motors.
_"I believe the power output can be doubled without having to increase the current usage"_ - Then you don't understand EM motors and don't know their history. :)
I watched 30 years ago as engineers at a Servo systems company built as they called them "Pancake" motors for robotics, some of which you can find on some robotic arms. They ran into problems with "Magnetic resonance" build up in the motors when the stacks were built. I agree with others about using an Induction motor for comparison, not apples too apples. The main difference with the motors besides permanent magnets, is the Induction motor is pulled by the electric field, were as most brush-less Permanent Magnet motor rotors are pushed by the electric field.
All types of rotating electric motors simultaneously push and pull.
Fascinating. Not sure I totally understood the fluxes but enough to get the general idea. Only query, if the axial thrust motor is so good, why isn't it used?
Thank you.❤