A high-performance dual-stator permanent-magnet vernier machine for propulsion applications

Allahyari A., Mahmoudi A., Torkaman H., Kahourzade S.

ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING, vol.104, no.5, pp.3253-3263, 2022 (SCI-Expanded) identifier identifier

  • Publication Type: Article / Article
  • Volume: 104 Issue: 5
  • Publication Date: 2022
  • Doi Number: 10.1007/s00202-022-01539-y
  • Journal Indexes: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), Scopus, Academic Search Premier, Compendex, INSPEC, DIALNET
  • Page Numbers: pp.3253-3263
  • Keywords: Dual airgap, Dual-stator permanent-magnet machine, Finite-element analysis, High torque density, Vernier machine, PM MOTOR, GENERATOR
  • Middle East Technical University Affiliated: Yes


This paper proposes two structures of dual-stator permanent-magnet vernier machines (VMs) for high-torque low-speed applications. The proposed structures consist of dual-sided rotor which is sandwiched by inner and outer stators. These topologies include 22 and 46 consequent-pole magnets in the rotor and 24 and 48 stator slots for Design A and Design B, respectively. Design A is an improved structure of dual stator VM and Design B is a novel topology of a dual stator VM that can deliver considerably higher back-EMF and torque than Design A. The only drawback in Design B is lower power factor. The characteristics and performance parameters of the proposed VMs are evaluated using FEA. Sensitivity analysis is used to figure out the optimum dimensions of the magnets. In fact, two combinations of slot/pole number of the vernier machines are investigated as Design A and Design B. The capabilities of the proposed vernier machines are presented in a fair comparison with other VMs namely as consequent pole dual rotor VM (CPDRVM), consequent pole dual stator VM (CPDSVM) and dual stator spoke array VM (DSSAVM). In this regard, the key machine features considered for comparison are back-EMF, torque, torque per magnet volume (TPMV), power factor, loss, and efficiency profiles. The proposed structure (Design B) generates higher torque and TPMV compared to the other studied machines while Design A can achieve a higher power factor.