Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
1 Introduction
2 Literature Review
2.1 Linear electromagnetic machines (LEMs) . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.2 Long-Stator Linear Synchronous Motor Drive . . . . . . . . .
3
3
4
3 Comparison Study
3.1 Steam Catapult vs. Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System
(EMALS) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.2 Linear Induction Motor vs. Linear Synchronous Motor . . .
3.2.1 Flexibility to variable and uncertain demand . . . . .
3.2.2 Reliability of operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.2.3 Capital cost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.2.4 Operational cost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
11
.
.
.
.
.
.
11
17
17
19
20
22
4 Analytical Design
24
5 Conclusion
45
List of Figures
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
3.1
4
6
6
7
3.2
3.3
3.4
Steam catapult being used for Launching a jet from a naval aircraft
carrier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Disk Alternator Cross Section . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
EMALS launch Motor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
EMALS being tested on a US navy ship . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4.1
.
.
.
.
12
14
17
18
List of Tables
3.1
EMALS REQUIREMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Abstract
Linear synchronous motors (LSMs), which have great advantages, such
as simple structure, high positioning accuracy, good performance, high thrust
force density, high dynamic response, are widely used in high precision direct drive field. Linear Synchronous Motor (LSM) technology is scalable and
adaptable to a wide range of applications, from small transport and positioning systems to large people movers. Unlike short stroke linear motors,
LSMs generate propulsive force by running current through a stator creating
an electro-magnetic field that interacts with a set of permanent magnets on
a vehicle to create thrust. The permanent magnets serve as the motor secondary, equivalent to a rotor in conventional motors, enabling linear motion.
The magnet array and vehicle is propelled by the moving electro-magnetic
field, traveling along as electric current is applied to the stator beneath the
vehicle. The vehicles movement is regulated by a sophisticated control system incorporating state-of-the-art position sensing technology.
With the proliferation of electromagnetic launch systems presently being
designed, built, or studied, there appears to be no limit to their application.
One of the intriguing applications is electromagnetically catapulting aircraft
from the deck of an aircraft carrier.
This report describes the design and analysis of a very large actuator for
a military ship system - an Electro-Magnetic Aircraft Launching System, or
EMALS, which will accelerate aircraft to flight speeds in very short distances.
The aim is to replace the steam catapult currently used on aircraft carriers
with a Linear electric motor. The entire system should fit within the confines
of the existing steam catapult. The advantages of such a system are increased
operational availability, lower airframe stress due to programmable acceleration profiles, and reduced maintenance (and hence reduced manning). The
goal of the study described here is to investigate the many feasible solutions
and to use simulations to compare their performance.
Chapter 1
Introduction
Electro-Magnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS) is a complete carrierbased launch system designed for Naval Aircraft Carriers. The launching
system is designed to expand the operational capability of the Navys future
carriers. The mission and function of EMALS remains the same as traditional steam catapult; however, it employs entirely dierent technologies.
EMALS uses stored kinetic energy and solid-state electrical power conversion. This technology permits a high degree of computer control, monitoring
and automation. The system will also provide the capability for launching
all current and future carrier air wing platforms lightweight unmanned systems to heavy strike fighters. As the 21st century dawns, steam catapults
are running out of steam. Massive systems that require significant manpower
to operate and maintain, they are reaching the limits of their abilities, especially as aircraft continue to gain weight. Electromagnetic catapults will
require less manpower to operate and improve reliability; they should also
lengthen aircraft service life by being gentler on airframes.
The amount of steam needed to launch an airplane depends on the crafts
weight, and once a launch has begun, adjustments cannot be made. If too
much steam is used, the nose wheel landing gear, which attaches to the catapult, can be ripped o the aircraft. If too little steam is used, the aircraft
wont reach takeo speed and will tumble into the water. The launch control system for electromagnetic catapults, on the other hand, will know what
speed an aircraft should have at any point during the launch sequence, and
can make adjustments during the process to ensure that an aircraft will be
within 3 mph (4.827 km) of the desired takeo speed.
The present EMALS design centers around a linear synchronous motor,
supplied power from pulsed disk alternators through a cycloconverter. Average power, obtained from an independent source on the host platform, is
stored kinetically in the rotors of the disk alternators. It is then released
in a 2-3 second pulse during a launch. This high frequency power is fed to
the cycloconverter which acts as a rising voltage, rising frequency source to
the launch motor. The linear synchronous motor takes the power from the
cycloconverter and accelerates the aircraft down the launch stroke, all the
while providing real time closed loop control[1].
Chapter 2
Literature Review
2.1
Figure 2.1: Linear electric machines (a) with progressive motion (LEMs) (After
Boldea, I. Nasar, S.A., Linear Motion Electromagnetic Devices, Taylor Francis,
New York, 2001); (b) with oscillatory resonant motion (LOMs): motor plus generator (a. linear motor, b. linear generator, c. resonant springs (features), d.
coupling shaft). (After Pompermaier, C. et al., IEEE Trans. IE, 58, 2011.)
the entire device life (10 years or more). Linear progressive motion machines
may be classified by principle into Linear induction machines (with sinusoidal current control) Linear synchronous (brushless ac) machines (with
sinusoidal current control) Linear brushless dc machines (with trapezoidal
(block) current control) Linear dc brush machines
2.2
Basic configuration
LSM drives with electromagnets were developed and are utilized for the
German Transrapid maglev system for high-speed transportation. [7] This
system has been tested in Emsland, Germany since 1984, and is now applied
to the 30 km Shanghai Pudong Airport connection to city-center. A very
low-speed system for urban applications, the German M-Bahn, was utilized
in Berlin for a few years beginning in 1988 as a demonstration track.[8]
The basic system construction of the long-stator linear synchronous motor (LSM) drive is shown in Figure 2.2 through Figure 2.4. Figure 2.2 shows
the Transrapid TR08 maglev vehicle that is the type of vehicle being installed
in the Shanghai airport-city connector line. As with the LIM-driven system,
propulsion-levitation modules that wrap around the guideway are located on
each side of each vehicle. Each module contains the exciting field magnets
of the LSM that also serve as the levitation magnets that pull the vehicle
up to the LSM stator magnets packs attached to the guideway. Figure 2.3
shows a side-view cross-section of the LSM with the 3-phase primary winding embedded in the stator core on the guideway and the vehicles levitation
magnets.
The long stators of the LSM located on the guideway form the active
track. The reactive forces of propulsion and vehicle levitation act on the
stator cores. Its supporting structure is required to have enough strength to
handle repeated loading of this force, and the stator coils need to be isolated
from ground. Dimensions of the stators are determined by the highest performance requirement of the systems.
In order to reduce operational losses and for stability of the power supply
system, the long stator of the LSM is separated into a number of sections
controlled by the section switches. The minimum length between two section
switches depends on the required acceleration and length of a train. The operating frequency of the section switches becomes high if a large number of
trains are operated on the track each day.
The currents in the stator coils must be synchronized with the trains
position and velocity. Proper control of the train can only be accomplished
by sending information to the converter stations through the use of sensing
equipment and signal transmission systems. Because synchronization is essential to the LSM, the sensing and signal transmission system must have
high precision and reliability.
The railway substation shown in Figure 2.4 is connected to the power
5
Figure 2.3: Cross-section of segment of LSM. Flux,, from the exciting magnet
interacts with the travelling magnetic wave from the stator to generate vehicle
thrust
Figure 2.4: Block Diagram of the power circuit for the LSM
Advantages
Vehicle drive power is supplied by the long-stator, winding attached to
the guideway. Because the stator winding and power conditioning equipment
is located wayside, the vehicle should be generally lighter. This permits the
operation at high-speed (up to 500 kph has been demonstrated) because the
7
vehicle does not bear the weight of the high-power primary propulsion components needed to obtain these speeds, nor does the electric power need to
be transferred to the vehicle. The power-rating capability of the motor can
be tailored to the requirements of the specific section of route such as regions
of high grade or at the station for high acceleration.
The Transrapid and other proposed LSM systems also use the on-board
levitation electromagnets (or permanent magnets) as part of the field source
for the LSM propulsion. This results in a highly integrated bogie design that
reduces vehicle weight, and helps reduce the requirements of the levitation
control system to mitigate the eects of transverse forces on ride quality.
Other systems such as power generation and operation control can be integrated with drive system. The placement of main power components on
the wayside and reduction in vehicle weight results in high acceleration and
deceleration capability. However, the utility of the high acceleration is limited by ride comfort, seat-belt operating conditions, and safety requirements.
Within these limits for the FTA urban maglev program, both LIM and
LSM have the capability to meet the high-acceleration requirements, and
neither has a particular advantage in terms of the superiority of these three
factors.
The electrical-to-mechanical conversion eciency of LSM is high at the
terminals of the guideway motor, but the impedance of the active block length
of the motor reduces that value. A detailed analysis conducted for the U.S.
Dept. of Transportation National Maglev Initiative modelled the Transrapid
TR07 LSM with a lumped-parameter synchronous motor circuit model.[9]
This model was benchmarked with data from the Transrapid TR06-II motor, and the author of that study indicates that the agreement with data was
excellent. For the TR07 with an on-board active length of 45 meter with
a relatively-short LSM block section length of 300 meters, the eciency at
the terminals of the LSM immediately below the vehicle is 98% at a vehicle speed of 200 kph in maximum-thrust operating mode. The eciency at
the terminals of the LSM block section is 85%, and at the output of the
8
complicated and many converters are needed since vehicles are moving slowly,
more closely spaced, and switching direction or routes. The vehicle has an
LSM motor on both the port and starboard sides, and each of these is powered by independent power supplies at the transitions between stator sections.
These supplies must have high reliability for balanced thrust from both sides
of the vehicle. The field magnet of LSM is also commonly used for vertical
suspension, which means it is operated continuously. This requires a very
reliable on-board power supply including batteries. In the event of a malfunction of trackside stators, the riding comfort is significantly deteriorated.
The performance of the transportation system is determined by the configuration of the active guideway, and the system is not adaptable to the
change of passenger demand. Vehicles cannot be added easily to accommodate changes outside the original design (although they are easily removed).
The LSM must be configured, and the initial investment made to accommodate the highest demand anticipated over the life of the design. For ecient
use of capital investment, a very accurate estimate of demand is necessary.
10
Chapter 3
Comparison Study
3.1
The steam catapults are large, heavy, and operate without feedback control. They impart large transient loads to the airframe and are dicult and
time consuming to maintain. The steam catapult is also approaching its operational limit with the present complement of naval aircraft. The inexorable
trend towards heavier, faster aircraft will soon result in launch energy requirements that exceed the capability of the steam catapult. An electromagnetic
launch system oers higher launch energy capability, as well as substantial improvements in areas other than performance. These include reduced
weight, volume, and maintenance; and increased controllability, availability,
reliability, and eciency.
The existing steam catapults currently installed on Naval carriers consist of two parallel rows of slotted cylinders in a trough 1.07 m deep, 1.42
m wide, and 101.68 m long, located directly below the flight deck. Pistons
within these cylinders connect to the shuttle which tows the aircraft. The
steam pressure forces the pistons forward, towing the shuttle and aircraft at
ever increasing speed until takeo is achieved. While the catapult has many
years of operation in the fleet, there are many drawbacks inherent in the
steam system. The foremost deficiency is that the catapult operates without
11
Figure 3.1: Steam catapult being used for Launching a jet from a naval aircraft
carrier
feedback control. With no feedback, there often occur large transients in tow
force that can damage or reduce the life of the airframe. Also, extra force is
always added due to the unpredictability of the steam system. This tends to
unnecessarily overstress the airframe. Even if a closed loop control system
was added to the steam catapult, it would have to be highly complex to significantly reduce the thrust transients to a reasonable level. Other drawbacks
to the steam catapult include a high volume of 1133 m3 , and a weight of 486
metric tons. Most of this is top-side weight that adversely impacts the ships
stability and righting moment. The large volume allocated to the steam catapult occupies prime real estate on the carrier. The steam catapults are
also highly maintenance intensive, inecient (4-6%), and their availability is
low. Another major disadvantage is the present operational energy limit of
the steam catapult, approximately 95 MJ. The need for higher payload energies will push the steam catapult to be a bigger, bulkier, and more complex
system.
12
The requirements of the EMALS are driven by the aircraft, the carrier,
and the operational requirements of the carriers airwing. These requirements
are:
Endspeed
Max Peak-to-Mean Tow Force Ratio
Launch Energy
Cycle Time
Weight
Volume
Endspeed variation
28-103 m/s
1.05
122 MJ
45 seconds
< 225,000 kg
< 425 m3
0 to +l.5 m/s
the slots for better thermal conduction to the outside casing. The generator
windings are closer to the air gap to reduce the reactance during the pulse
generation. The use of high strength permanent magnets allows for a high
pole pair number, 20, which gives a better utilization of the overall active
area. The rotor is an inconel forging with an inconel hoop for prestress.
The four disk alternators are mounted in a torque frame and are paired in
counter-rotating pairs to reduce the torque and gyroscopic eects. The rotors
operate at a maximum of 6400 rpm and store a total of 121 MJ each. This
gives an energy density of 18.1 KJ/KG, excluding the torque frame.
Each disk alternator is a six phase machine with phase resistance and
reactance of 8.6 m and 10.4 pH, respectively. At max speed, the output of
one of the disk alternators would be 81.6 MW into a matched load. The
frequency of this output is 2133 Hz and drops to 1735 Hz at the end of the
pulse, for a max launch. Machine excitation is provided by the NdBFe 35
MGOe permanent magnets, which are housed in the rotor. These magnets
have a residual induction of 1.05 T at 40o C and create an average working air
gap flux density of 0.976 T, with tooth flux densities approaching 1.7 T. The
stator consists of a radially lotted laminated core with 240 active slots and
liquid cold plate. The maximum back EMF developed is 1122 V. Maximum
output voltage is 1700 V (L-L) peak and current is 6400 A peak per phase.
The disk alternators overall eciency is 89.3%, with total losses of 127 KW
14
per alternator. This heat transfers out of the disk alternator through a cold
plate on the outside of each stator. The coolant is a WEG mixture with
a flow rate of 151 litres/minute. The average temperature of the copper is
84o C, while the back iron temperature is 61o C.
B. Cycloconverter
The cycloconverter, or power electronics in general, is the pivotal technology allowing EMALS to become a reality aboard ship. With a 103 m long
motor, power electronics permit ecient operation by turning on only the
coils that can aect the launch at a particular time rather than the entire
motor at once. It also permits EMALS to operate at its most ecient point
at all speeds by allowing for a variable voltage, variable frequency supply.
The cycloconverter is a naturally commutated 34-14 bridge circuit. The output of one bridge is paralleled / seriesed with outputs of other bridges to
attain the power levels required. By paralleling/seriesing the bridge outputs
and not the switches themselves, the design eliminates the current sharing
reactors and the series capacitors. The output of a cycloconverter is 0-644
Hz and 0-1520 V (L-L) the peak current output is 6400 A for a max launch.
The cooling for the switching assembles takes place through liquid cold plates
to which the components are mounted. The medium is de-ionized water at
35o C input, 100 psig max, 1363 litres/minute. This is required to dissipate
528 KW lost in the cycloconverters.
C. Linear Synchronous Motor
The launch motor is a linear synchronous coilgun, as shown in Fig.
3.2. The trough is the same as the steam catapult trough to allow for backfit capability. The motor itself is a dual, vertical stator configuration with
the active area facing outwards. The rotor, or carriage, sits over the stators
much like a saddle and protrudes through the flight deck to be attached to
the aircraft. The carriage contains 160 full permanent magnets, the same
type used in the disk alternator, NdBFe. The carriage is restrained in two
axes by rollers. The rollers run in channels welded to the stator frame. This
15
allows both the stator and trough to flex with the ship and the carriage to
follow this flexure while maintaining a consistent air gap of 6.35 mm. The
stator consists of 0.640 m long segments, which are 0.686 m high and almost
0.076 m thick. These segments turn on and o as the carriage passes. The
position sense system is based on Hall Eect sensors, much as in todays rotary brushless commutated motors. As can be seen in the figure, the stators
are protected by osetting them from the slot in the flight deck. This is due
to the contaminants, typically jet fuel, nuts, bolts, wrenches, hydraulic oil,
etc., that constantly invade the trough through the slot and could, over time
aect the stators. Between the stators, in an environmentally sealed housing,
are the busbars and the static switches, which are SCRs used to control the
power to the stator segments. The launcher stator is based on the modular
unit called a segment. There are a total of 298 segments, 149 per side, for
the entire launch motor, each 0.640 m long. The segment is wound as a
three phase lap winding with 6 turns per slot and a total of 24 slots. This
translates to 8 poles per segment and P pole pitch of 8 cm. These coils are
epoxied into a slotless stator structure with G10 separating the coil legs. The
slotless stator design keeps the phase inductance low at 18 pH. The phase
resistance is 41 m while the bus resistance is 0.67. The air gap working
flux is 0.896 T with the armature reaction of approximately 0.24 T. At full
thrust, the permanent magnets experience a shear stress of 38 psi. At the
end of the 103 m power stroke, the front of the carriage enters the brake.
This brake consists of shorted stator segments, which act as eddy current
brakes. At the same point in time, the carriage is still covering a number of
active stator segments. Two phases are switched in these segments so that
reverse thrust is initiated to help with the braking force.
With a projected eciency of 70% and peak losses of 13.3 MW in the
stator, active cooling will be necessary. Maximum coil action is 4.36e6 As,
resulting in a maximum copper temperature delta of 118.2o C. The launch
motor has an aluminium cold plate to remove this heat from the attached
stator windings and back iron. The cold plates consist of stainless steel
tubes in an aluminium casting. The peak temperature reaches approximately
155o C and, after cooling for the 45 second cycle time, cools to 75o C. The
16
3.2
3.2.1
3.2.2
Reliability of operation
19
3.2.3
Capital cost
The capital cost for a maglev system is dominated by the cost of the civil
structures including the guideway, and the size of that structure depends on
the loadings, including the weight of the vehicles. To obtain an accurate cost
comparison between the LIM and LSM propulsion methods, a detailed analysis must be done for a given route and ridership requirements. However,
there are features of each drive system than can be identified which have
significantly dierent cost elements.
The weight of the vehicle using the LSM drive is expected to be lighter
than one using the LIM since there is little on-board power conditioning
equipment. This would, in principle, reduce the cost of the guideway. However, from the design experience for the Colorado Urban Maglev Project, the
live load is a small part compared to the dead load weight of the structure
itself, and the weight of the car does not strongly influence the cost of the
guideway. It is also interesting to note that the 24.3 meter long, LIM-driven
COL-200 vehicle that carries 103 passengers weighs 44 tonne fully loaded,
while the 24.8 meter long, LSM-driven Transrapid vehicle that carries 126
passengers weighs approximately 60 tonnes fully loaded. While the Transrapid vehicle can achieve higher speed, its weight would not decrease if the
20
vehicle were limited to the 200 kph design speed of the COL-200.
The reaction rail structure in the guideway of a LIM-driven vehicle is very
simple with a conducting sheet anchored to steel that serves as back iron for
the motor. The active guideway of the LSM drive includes laminated stator
cores, stator coils, section switches, feeder cables, and signaling system for
synchronization of operation that is much more expensive. The stator coils
and core components must be very rugged to withstand the repeated cycling
of mechanical forces without degradation of insulation, operate for years in
all-weather conditions, and be low cost. As the complexity of the reaction
rail and power distribution of a LIM-driven system is significantly less than
that for an LSM system, the time required for construction and operational
testing is also considerably shorter. This results in lower overall capital investments costs.
The number of power converters per unit length of track may be similar assuming the same number and type of vehicles on that given length of
track. The LIM drive requires only a wayside rectification system to supply
the constant DC voltage to the vehicle on a single or double hot rail from
the wayside distributed utility electric power. However, each vehicle has a
variable-voltage, variable frequency inverter on board to drive the LIM. The
power to each of the LSM guideway stators is also conditioned through rectification to DC and then reformed to 3-phase AC at variable voltage and
frequency, and one inverter is needed per stator section assuming each section
powers a separate vehicle. However, even if the LSM track is not utilized at
full capacity, all the inverters and distribution network are required in the initial capital investment and all are operated as vehicles use each stator section.
While the LIM drive may have lower energy eciency, power factor, and
feeder voltage, this does not significantly increase the investment cost compared to the LSM. This is because the LSM has a more complicated converter
station, lower voltage coils, and 3-phase feeder to stators.
Because of the complexity of the LSM active guideway structure and
21
the synchronous operation of a LSM train, the system structure near end
terminals requires more physical space than LIM driven systems which further increases investment cost. The mechanical switch from track to track is
larger, and it takes more physical space to transfer LSM vehicles from one
track to another. As every LSM track section requires a converter, transfers
of many vehicles with short headways at slow speed requires more power
converters in these areas, all installed at the time of initial operation.
In the comparison of capital cost between maglev systems based on LIM
and LSM, it is very clear that the capital cost of the guideway for the system
with LSM is very substantially higher than that for the LIM. Conversely,
the capital cost of vehicles for the LIM-driven system is higher than for one
driven with an LSM. While the total capital costs of either the LIM or LSM
may be greater than that for a conventional railway system, the increase of
the LIM-driven system cost above the conventional system cost is certainly
less than the cost increase for an LSM-driven system.
3.2.4
Operational cost
The operational cost for a maglev system has major contributions including
energy and manpower. Again, an accurate cost comparison between the LIM
and LSM propulsion methods requires a detailed analysis for a given route
and ridership requirements. However, there are features of each drive system
than can be identified which can significantly aect these cost elements.
In general, the higher energy eciency of LSM drives will reduce the
energy cost compared to LIM systems. However, this very much depends on
the design of motor and power supply system. If the section length of the
LSM stator becomes long, the eciency is reduced. The eciency (ratio of
mechanical power to input real power) of the two drives is very similar, but
the power factor (ratio of real power to apparent power) is larger for the LSM.
The load seen by the utility is the real power, and hence, for this case, the
energy usage is the same assuming the same thrust vs. speed profiles along
the route. The consequence of the lower power factor for the LIM is the
22
23
Chapter 4
Analytical Design
MATLAB is a high-level language and interactive environment for numerical computation, visualization, and programming. Using MATLAB, you can
analyze data, develop algorithms, and create models and applications. The
language, tools, and built-in math functions enable you to explore multiple
approaches and reach a solution faster than with spreadsheets or traditional
programming languages, such as C/C++ or Java. You can use MATLAB for
a range of applications, including signal processing and communications, image and video processing, control systems, test and measurement, computational finance, and computational biology. More than a million engineers and
scientists in industry and academia use MATLAB, the language of technical
computing. we will write one program for calculation of DSLIM parameters
so that we can calculate main dimensions and other parameters for dierent
variables like frequency, current density , slot pitch.
24
DESIGN APPROACH
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
%no of phases
%stator phase voltage(volt)
% desired velocity(m/sec)
%efficiency
%power factor
%slip
%frequency (HZ)
%length (m)
%average flux density
%ampere conductors
%current density (A/mm2)
%pole pitch (m)
%weight (ton)
%slot per pole per phase
%no of turns per slot
%winding factor
%density of copper
%maximum flux density of yoke
%resistivity of alluminium (ohm*m)
%resistivity of iron (ohm*m)
%resistivity of cu (ohm*m)
disp(time(sec))
time=V/a
disp(output mechaical power(KW))
Pm=F*V
disp(input power electrical(KW))
Pin=Pm/n
disp(per phase current(A))
I=Pin/(3*V*pf)
disp(no of poles)
p=L/t
disp(slot pitch(m))
sp=(t/m*q)
disp(no of slots)
ns=2*m*sp
disp(slot width(m))
ws=sp/2
disp(tooth width(m))
wt=sp/2
disp(no of turns per phase)
N1=nc*p*q
disp(cross sectional area of wire(mm2))
Awt=I/j
33
Vy=L*ws*hy
disp(volume of tooth)
Vtooth=ws*wt*hs
disp(volume of teeth)
Vteeth=m*p*q*Vtooth
disp(volume of iron)
Viron=Vy+Vteeth
disp(weight of iron)
Wiron=rhoiron*Viron
disp(weight of stator)
Wstator=Wiron+Wcu
disp(per phase stator resistance)
R=(rhow*lw)/Awt
gm=0.015
d=0.010
go=gm+d
Y=(4/pi)*((ws/(2*go))*atan(ws/(2*go))-L*sqrt(1+(ws/(2*go))^2));
kc=sp/(sp-Y*go);
ge=kc*go;
ld=(s*(ge/ws))/(s+4*(go/ws));
kp=1;
le=0.3*(3*kp-1);
ls=(hs*(1+3*kp))/(12*ws);
disp(per phase stator slot reactance)
X=(2*pi*4*pi*(10^(-7))*f*((ls*(1+(3/p))+ld)*(ws/q)+le*lce)*N1)/p
35
disp(goodness factor)
G=(2*4*pi*((10)^(-7))*f*(t^2))/(pi*ge*(rhow/d))
wse=ws+go;
Xm=(24*4*pi*(10^(-7))*pi*f*wse*Kw*(N1^2)*t)/((pi^2)*400*ge);
E1=sqrt(2)*pi*f*Qp*Kw*N1
36
4
output mechaical power(KW)
Pm =
31250
input power electrical(KW)
Pin =
62500
per phase current(A)
I =
833.3333
no of poles
p =
400
slot pitch(m)
sp =
0.1667
no of slots
37
ns =
1
slot width(m)
ws =
0.0833
tooth width(m)
wt =
0.0833
no of turns per phase
N1 =
800
cross sectional area of wire(mm2)
Awt =
33.3333
cross sectional area of slot(mm2)
As =
47.6190
38
slot height(cm)
hs =
571.4286
current sheet strength
Jm =
67.3275
lce =
0.7000
length of one turn(m)
lw =
1.5667
length of Cu wire per phase(m)
lcu =
1.2533e+03
total length(m)
Tlw =
9.4000
39
Qp =
1.1321e+08
height of yoke
hy =
4.5283e+08
Volume of yoke
Vy =
3.7736e+09
volume of tooth
Vtooth =
40
3.9683
volume of teeth
Vteeth =
9.5238e+03
volume of iron
Viron =
3.7736e+09
weight of iron
Wiron =
366.4160
weight of stator
Wstator =
2.7890e+06
per phase stator resistance
R =
9.0569e-08
gm =
41
0.0150
d =
0.0100
go =
0.0250
per phase stator slot reactance
X =
0.1522
goodness factor
G =
39.2247
E1 =
3.8427e+13
42
Methodology
43
Figure 4.1: Maxwell3D Magnetic flux density Plot for a single winding
44
Chapter 5
Conclusion
Electromagnetic motors for both launching and recovery of aircraft
aboard a carrier are now possible due to a myriad of technical advancements.
The advantages of electromagnetic motors are their improved performance
capability over present systems and the resultant reduced weight and
volume because of the high power, force, and energy densities possible.
These savings are especially important on a carrier where they are precious
commodities. In the future Navy, weight and volume may be of even
higher importance as smaller budgets may demand smaller ships, and future
design will require, just as in automobiles and space vehicles, etc., more
performance out of smaller boxes. Electromagnetics oers this advantage.
These systems would also provide the inherent controllability that comes
with electrical machinery allowing for safer, less mechanically stressing
operations. This will lead to extended life of airframes, nose-gear, and
tail-hooks. Most importantly, electromagnetic motors will provide high level
forces and greater eciencies, which will permit the future generations of
heavier, faster aircraft to operate o a carrier. Systems need to be developed
that can produce the necessary performance. Electromagnetics oers a
viable option.
Each of the LIM and LSM type drives has their advantages and disadvantages
for maglev / EMALS propulsion. Although the guideway is more costly for
the LSM, it is the only appropriate choice for high-speed operation (>>250
45
46
Bibliography
[1] Michael R. Doyle, Douglas J. Samuel, Thomas Conway, Robert R.
Klimowski, Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System - EMALS, Naval
Air Warfare Center, Aircraft Division, Lakehurst, NJ 08733, IEEE Transactions on Magnetics, Vol. 31, NO. I . January 1995.
[2] S.A. Nasar and I. Boldea, Linear Motion Electric Machines, John Wiley
Interscience, New York, 1976.
[3] I. Boldea and S.A. Nasar, Linear Motion Electromagnetic Systems,
John Wiley Sons, New York, 1985.
[4] J.F. Gieras, Linear Induction Drives, Oxford University Press, Oxford,
U.K., 1994.
[5] J.F. Gieras, Linear Synchronous Motors, 2nd edn., CRC Press, Boca
Raton, FL, 2000.
[6] C. Pompermaier, F.J.H. Kalluf, A. Zambonetti, M.V. Ferreira, and I.
Boldea, Small linear PM oscillatory motor magnetic circuit modelling
corrected by asymmetric FEM and experimental characterization, IEEE
Trans. IE, 58, 2012, 13891396.
[7] Klaus Heinrich and Rolf Kretzchmar,Transrapid International, Transrapid Maglev System, eds., Hestra-Verlag, Darmstadt, 1989
[8] Husam (Sam) Gurol, General Atomics Linear Motor Applications: Moving Towards Deployment, Proceedings of the IEEE., Pg.1864-1871, Vol.
97, No. 11, November 2009.
47
48