Lenz's Law for a rotating PM motor rotor spinning in a thin CU tube

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around the challenges of adding a thin-walled copper tube inside a stator bore to provide damping for a rotating permanent magnet motor. Concerns are raised about insufficient clearance between the rotor and the copper insert, which could affect motor operation. Alternatives to traditional damping windings are explored, including using circuitry to switch a resistor across non-energized windings or ramping stator current to achieve similar damping effects. The feasibility of these options is debated, with a preference for simpler solutions. Overall, the integration of the copper tube and potential modifications to the motor's electronics are critical to achieving effective damping.
Neumahn
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
TL;DR Summary
I am trying to determine the damping generated by spinning a motor rotor in a thin-walled copper tube. This is a stepper motor with 40 magnets radially charged along the circumference.
The motor is required to operate at its resonance frequency and I am looking to add a thin-walled (0.010") copper tube inside the stator bore to add some damping. The current motor air-gap is 0.015". If I install a copper tube in the stator bore bonded to the stator and leave a 0.005" air-gap between the tube and the rotor how would I calculate the damping torque as a function of motor speed?

Normally we could install a damping winding but these motors are already built and there is no room for a damping coil.

Thank you,

Neumahn
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Engineering news on Phys.org
Welcome to PF.

The 15 thou clearance is probably needed for bearing movement and wear. You will probably be left with insufficient clearance, so the motor poles will connect with the copper insert.

With a copper sleeve in the gap the motor will probably not operate like a stepper motor. The copper sleeve would be driven like an induction motor. Could you short circuit the existing windings while they are not being driven to provide the required damping?
 
No, the electronics are open on the redundant winding and we have no control over them. The other option being considered is making new stators and adding a third damping coil. This is a painful option as it requires considerable schedule.
 
You could probably get away with the Copper sleeve but only at slow step rates. The Copper will act like a single shorted-turn secondary of the stator windings. Since a transformer operates only on a varying current, once the current settles the Cu will have no effect on the field windings and will allow the the static magnetic field to reach the rotor.

You could get a similar effect by slowly ramping the stator current. This would not necessarily require a change in the drive electronics, as you could put an Integrator circuit between the windings and the existing electronics. That may or may not be cheaper than modifying the motor.

Alternatively, you could put circuitry between the windings and the existing electronics to switch a resistor across the non-energized windings, using them as a damping winding.

The above has been a stream-of-consciousness. The last option seems the simplest.

Cheers,
Tom

p.s. be aware that dis-assembling a stepper motor often means a significant decrease performance. Something to do with altering the magnetic characteristics.
 
Neumahn said:
If I install a copper tube in the stator bore bonded to the stator
As I understand it, a two or three phase stepper motor is being run as a synchronous motor.

The damping windings are used to start rotation as an induction motor until the PM poles of the rotor synchronously lock to the rotating stator field.

That suggests a squirrel cage of damping windings should be installed in the PM rotor, NOT in the stator poles of the phase windings.
 
Very basic question. Consider a 3-terminal device with terminals say A,B,C. Kirchhoff Current Law (KCL) and Kirchhoff Voltage Law (KVL) establish two relationships between the 3 currents entering the terminals and the 3 terminal's voltage pairs respectively. So we have 2 equations in 6 unknowns. To proceed further we need two more (independent) equations in order to solve the circuit the 3-terminal device is connected to (basically one treats such a device as an unbalanced two-port...
suppose you have two capacitors with a 0.1 Farad value and 12 VDC rating. label these as A and B. label the terminals of each as 1 and 2. you also have a voltmeter with a 40 volt linear range for DC. you also have a 9 volt DC power supply fed by mains. you charge each capacitor to 9 volts with terminal 1 being - (negative) and terminal 2 being + (positive). you connect the voltmeter to terminal A2 and to terminal B1. does it read any voltage? can - of one capacitor discharge + of the...
Thread 'Weird near-field phenomenon I get in my EM simulation'
I recently made a basic simulation of wire antennas and I am not sure if the near field in my simulation is modeled correctly. One of the things that worry me is the fact that sometimes I see in my simulation "movements" in the near field that seems to be faster than the speed of wave propagation I defined (the speed of light in the simulation). Specifically I see "nodes" of low amplitude in the E field that are quickly "emitted" from the antenna and then slow down as they approach the far...
Back
Top