Comparison of PCB winding topologies for axial-flux permanent magnet synchronous machines


IET ELECTRIC POWER APPLICATIONS, vol.14, no.13, pp.2577-2586, 2020 (Peer-Reviewed Journal) identifier identifier

  • Publication Type: Article / Article
  • Volume: 14 Issue: 13
  • Publication Date: 2020
  • Doi Number: 10.1049/iet-epa.2020.0622
  • Journal Indexes: Science Citation Index Expanded, Scopus, Academic Search Premier, PASCAL, Aerospace Database, Applied Science & Technology Source, Business Source Elite, Business Source Premier, Communication Abstracts, Compendex, Computer & Applied Sciences, INSPEC, Metadex, Civil Engineering Abstracts
  • Page Numbers: pp.2577-2586


Although axial-flux permanent magnet machines have high torque densities, challenges regarding mass production of stators make them a less appealing choice. Printed circuit board (PCB) axial-flux machine is a type of machine with a stator that is made of layers of PCB. Given the precise, fast, and cheap mass production capabilities of PCB manufacturers, PCB axial-flux machines stand as a viable alternative for conventional round-wire winding machines. In this study, five different winding topologies are compared. Their induced phase voltages and torque are calculated using the developed magnetic scalar potential method and finite element analysis (FEA). Proposed windings are tested on a 16-pole, 2000-RPM, double rotor-single stator axial-flux permanent magnet synchronous machine. Results showed that the parallel winding had the smallest resistance and loss. Moreover, radial and concentric winding had the highest induced voltage and torque while the radial winding had 20% less phase resistance than concentric. Also, the induced voltage of radial winding had the smallest total harmonic distortion in comparison with other winding types. A novel unequal width parallel winding is proposed and it is compared with parallel winding separately. It is found that by simply increasing the cross-section area of wave windings, it is possible to decrease copper loss by 17%.