2011 IEEE International Electric Machines & Drives Conference (IEMDC)
A Brushless DC Motor Design for an Aircraft
Electro-Hydraulic Actuation System
Xiaoyan Huang1, Chris Gerada2, Andrew Goodman2, Keith Bradley2, He Zhang2 ,Youtong Fang1
1. College of Electrical Engineering, Zhejiang University, 310027, P. R.China.
2. Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering,University of Nottingham, NG7 2RD, U.K.
Abstract—This paper describes a 5-phase Brushless DC
motor designed for an electro-hydrostatic actuation system.
The foundation of the design is a motor with compact
structure, low weight, fault tolerance and high reliability.
The motor power rating is 12kW at 12,000 rpm and a “wet”
form of construction is used where hydraulic oil is present
in the motor in order to reduce the number of oil seals of
the EHA for enhanced reliability and lifetime. The thermal
behavior is evaluated for an optimized design. Fault
tolerance for Brushless DC motors will be discussed. A
5-phase motor has been manufactured and test results are
presented to validate the design.
Index Terms—Brushless DCmotor; EHA; Single sided
matrix converter
I. INTRODUCTION
S
INCE the more electric aircraft concept emerged in 1970s,
electrical-hydraulic actuation systems (EHA) have been
intensively investigated due to advantages in terms of
reduced weight, compact structure, easier maintenance,
increased safety and enhanced reliability [1]-[3]. It consists of
an electrical motor drive, a hydraulic pump and bypass valve as
shown in Fig.1. The aim of this paper is to design a fault
tolerant electrical motor for EHA in aerospace applications.
Motor Hydraulic pump
Power
Converter
Bypass Valve
Fig.1. Simplified Schematic Diagram of EHA
In safety critical applications, the fault tolerance and
reliability of the whole electrical drive including the motor and
power converter are of equally great importance. From the
power converter point of view, a single sided matrix converter
(SSMC) is highlighted and selected for aerospace applications
for high reliability due to the absence of bulky capacitors which
cannot operate reliably in the extremes of aerospace
environmental conditions and the simple commutation
technique [4]-[6]. The SSMC can only provide uni-directional
DC current as shown in Fig.2. The Brushless DC motor (BLDC)
and Switch Reluctance (SR) motors are both suitable
candidates for use with the SSMC. Finally, the BLDC motor
was selected over the SR motor due to its superior power
density. In this paper, a BLDC motor will be designed to work
with the SSMC and furthermore to meet the requirements of
aerospace applications.
978-1-4577-0061-3/11/$26.00 ©2011 IEEE
Fig. 2. Single Sided Matrix Converter per Phase
II. REQUIREMENTS FOR MOTOR DESIGN
A 12kW, 2000 ~12000 rpm BLDC motor is required to drive
the pump. The conventional design criteria for the complete
motor are listed in Table 1 which includes the power supply,
electrical performances and mechanical performances.
TABLE I
MOTOR DESIGN REQUIREMENTS
Supply Voltage 115 V (360Hz~800Hz)
Output Power 200w ~ 12 kW
Speed Range 2000~12000rpm
Duty Cycle Full load <1 min
Cooling Method Circulated Skydrol oil and Natural Air
convection
Operating Temperature Range -50 ~ 70 °C
Fault tolerance, high reliability and a compact structure with
high power density are the foundations of the design of EHA
for aerospace applications. The BLDC motor is connected to
the pump directly through the shaft. Seals, which keep the
hydraulic oil in the actuator, are a potential source of premature
failure and minimizing their number enhances reliability. To
minimize the number of sliding surface oil seals in the actuator
for higher reliability and longer life time, the motor is immersed
internally in Skydrol to avoid shaft seals. In this case, the
maximum temperature allowed in the motor design is limited
by the maximum 120˚C operating temperature for Skydrol.
Furthermore, Skydrol produces a hydraulic power loss as it
circulates through the relatively short air gap and this loss is the
most significant loss at high speed operation. Consequently, the
thermal design of the BLDC motor is of great importance to
ensure safe operation.
III. MOTOR DESIGN AND OPTIMIZATION
A. Multi-phase Design for Fault Tolerance
The reliability of the 3-phase SSMC is limited by the feature
of uni-directional current supply. For a typical 3-phase
bi-directional current supply, two of the phases will be
conducting at any time. However, for the SSMC, in a 3-phase
motor only one phase can be conducting due to the
1153
uni-directional current supply. Thus multi-phhase design needs 4-phase motor. However, the copperr loss produced is more than
to be investigated to improve the fault tolerancce. A multi-phase the 4-phase motor. The higher numb ber of phases, the higher the
motor design can fulfill the aerospace requirements in terms of average torque and the lower the torrque ripple will be.
safety and reliability [7]-[9]. Open circuit in one phase win nding is one of the most
Finite element method models of differennt phase number common motor faults, with many possible
p causes. However,
BLDC motors were built to investigate their respective the impact can be limited by the mullti-phase motor design. The
performances. In this paper, the comparisonn is based on the BLDC can still continue to operrate even if the fault is
assumption that the same quantity of coppper is used. The undetected, with the penalty of high current.
number of turns varies with the number of pphases in order to Fig.4 shows the output torque for motors
m with different phase
keep the amount of copper constant. By keeping the same flux numbers and uni-directional supply currents,
c under healthy and
density in the air gap with the same rotor conffiguration and the faulty conditions (single phase openn circuit). Compared to the
same rotational speed, the amplitude of bacck EMF for each 6-phase motor, the torque produced d by the 5-phase motor is
2.99%, 4.19% less respectively at heealthy and faulty condition.
motor varies with the number of turns and thee rotor position as
However, 20% extra power electronic components are required
shown in Fig.3.
for 6-phase motor. As a result, the 5-phase BLDC motor was
3-phase(40 turns) 4-phase(30 turns)
t finally chosen as a compromise betw ween fault tolerance, weight
5-phase(24 turns) 6-phase(20 turns)
t
and volume.
60

40

20
Back emf

0
0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 70
27 300 330 360
-20

-40

-60
Rotor position Fig. 4. Comparison of output Torques

Fig.3. Back EMF waveforms for multi-phasse motors B. Permanent Magnet Optimization n
To improve the reliability of the motor, att least two phases A surface mounted permanent maagnet (PM) was used in this
should be conducting at any time. For a 3-pphase motor, each design due to higher power density, with the rotor core being
phase needs to be conducting for 2/3 of thhe cycle at 240° slightly modified to an octagon to prevent
p sliding between the
electrical degree. However, for the back EMF F, the positive flat rotor surface and the PMs as shown in Fig.5.
top area is around 120° as shown in Fig.3. Thus for a 3-phase
motor, two phases conducting at any time iss infeasible. For a
4-phase motor each phase needs to conduct 180°, which will
result in large torque ripple due to the shape oof back EMF. For
5,6-phase motors, the conduction angles are 144° and 120°,
which conform to the shape back EMF. As a consequence, the
torque ripple will be reduced dramatically.
The performance of the multi-phase mottors with various
uni-directional current supplies is investigateed. The average
Fig. 5. Shapes of th
he PMs
torque and the torque ripples are listed in Tabble Ⅱ. The PM thickness is a significantt parameter since it affects
TABLE Ⅱ
COMPARISON OF OUTPUT TORQUE OF MULTI-PHA
ASE MOTORS
the flux density in the airgap, the demagnetisation
d withstand
capability and the cost. A special feaature of this BLDC motor is
Number of Conduction Excitation Averagge Torque
the “wet” operation. Therefore, a laarge air gap will be used to
Phases Angle Current (A) Torquee(Nm) Ripple(%)
minimize viscous losses.
3 120˚ 48 9.235 18.98%
The arc of the PMs is also optimized to minimize the torque
4 180˚ 32 7.118 31.54%
ripple. The peak cogging torque with different magnet arcs is
90˚ 64 9.524 11.43% shown in Fig.6. It can be seen that thet peak cogging torque is
5 144˚ 40 10.5177 8.05% relatively small, and therefore the magnets
m are not skewed in
6 120˚ 48 10.8422 3.25% this application. The 75˚ magnet po ole pitch produced the least
The same supply current per phase is requireed for the 3-phase cogging torque. However, the flat top area of the back emf
and 6-phase motor with 120˚ conduction. Thee 6-phase motor is waveform reduces as the arc reducces. Large torque pulsation
more fault tolerant with the same copper losss. The copper loss will occur during commutation when w the arc of the PMs
of the 4- phase motor with 90˚ conduction iss twice that of the decreases, which will also reduce the t average output torque.
180˚ conduction condition, while the torque ppulsation is much Consequently, an arc of 80˚ is a good compromise between the
lower than the 180˚ conduction condition. Thhe 5-phase motor cogging torque ripple and the comm mutation torque ripple.
produces higher average torque but lower toorque ripple than

1154
 1.2
IV. BLDC PERFORMANCE
Peak Cogging Torque (N*m) 1 A. Motor Operation with Armature Reaction
0.8 The PMs have the potential risk of demagnetization which
0.6
may result in the motor failure. Investigation of the resistance to
demagnetization with armature reaction is thus of great
0.4
importance to ensure high reliability. The PMs can operate
0.2 reliably when the current is less than 120A according to the
0 simplified calculations. A more accurate FEM model is built.
70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 The flux distribution under full load condition is shown in
Mechanical Angle (Degrees) Fig.8.
Fig. 6. Peak cogging torque with varies magnet arc

C. Thermal Design to Maximize the Power to Weight/volume

Ratio
The ratio is mainly restrained by the operating environment
temperature and the cooling method once the power
requirement is determined. In this design the weight/volume is
compromised by the requirement of fault tolerance and
hydraulic losses.
The choice of stack length to rotor diameter was influenced
by the hydraulic loss and the critical shaft speed. Hydraulic loss Fig.8. Flux density in the motor at Ia =40A
increases rapidly with diameter of the rotor and directly with its
length. The hydraulic loss can easily dominate all other losses The PMs can withstand 120A current, at maximum
in the machine at 12,000rpm. The air gap length and rotor temperature without demagnetizing as shown in Fig.9. If the
magnet retaining can thickness are designed with minimum motor winding has a turn-turn short circuit, the pulse of current
values,the former being influenced by hydraulic loss. Thus may be greater than this level. Therefore demagnetization
magnet thickness is mostly defined and consequently is the might still be possible in this condition; however the likelihood
diameter of the solid rotor shaft and rotor core. This in turn of it happening did not compromise the required system
restricts the minimum rotor diameter both through increasing reliability level.
inter pole magnetic leakage flux and through the shaft critical
speed.
Initial designs were simulated thermally using Motorcad.
The temperature rise waveforms of the components including
stator winding and housing are shown in Fig.7. It can be seen
that the maximum temperatures are around 100˚C which is less
than the Skydrol temperature limit.

Fig. 9. Flux density in the motor at Ia =120A

B. Motor Operation at High Temperatures

Samarium Cobalt is selected due to its low temperature
coefficient. FEM simulations under no load condition were
performed to predict the performance of the motor at 150˚C , as
shown in Fig.10 . The peak value of flux density reduces from
1.57T at 20˚C to 1.49T at 150˚C. The average back EMF
reduces from 28.72 to 28.0V. The torque is proportional to the
back EMF at the same speed and armature current and therefore
it reduces by 2.57%, which is within the tolerance range for the
design and is easily accommodated with a small increase in
Fig.7.Temperature Rises of the Components phase current.
The final design has a large fin area to keep the motor and
Skydrol temperature down. Thermal analysis was limited by
the need to allow a margin of safety for the hydraulic loss of the
variable displacement pump which is dependent in part on the
difference between the high outlet pressure and the low inlet
pressure and the volume leakage rate past the pistons. This
latter could not be precisely determined as the pump was a
prototype.

1155
 VI. TESTING RESULTS
A. Results to Verify the Electro-Ma agnetic Design
The first step of the test wass measuring the 5-phase
resistances and inductances which were
w recorded in Table Ⅲ.
The resistances are 17.7% higher than the predicted value
because the resistance in the end winding is difficult to be
predict accurately, as well as the slo
ot fill factor until the coils
have been assembled in the mo otor due to the practical
Fig.10. Flux density under no loading condittion at 150˚C limitations of winding the machine. The average inductance of
the 5-phase windings is 8.13% lesss than the predicted value.
V. MOTOR CONSTRUCTION The inductances varied slightly withh the rotor position because
The stator stack is built from 0.35mm thicck laminations as of the interaction between slot opening and the gap between the
shown in Fig.11 (a). The ideal lamination matterial should have PMs. Consequently, the inductancess are slightly different from
low magnetic reluctance but high electrical resistance. The each other at any rotor position. Thee measured resistances and
single layer winding is employed for higheer reliability and inductances indicated the windings were
w correctly constructed.
TABLE Ⅲ
smaller magnetic coupling between phases. Paarticular attention MEASURED RESISTANCES ANND INDUCTANCE
should be given to the insulation material, whhich must be fully Resistance(Ω) Inductance
I (mH)
resistant to degradation by Skydrol.
0.143 0.702
Owing to the large effective air gap lengthh in the design, a 0.139 0.742
solid rotor could be employed for better mecchanical integrity. 0.141 0.676
The material used for the solid rotor is E EN24 steel. The
0.144 0.656
assembled rotor, shaft, the magnet segments and the retaining
can are shown in Fig.11(b) The 1mm retaininng can is designed 0.145 0.669
to withstand the centrifugal force of the maagnet segments at The open circuit test was done at a 2000rpm. The measured
high speeds. The material used for the can is non-magnetic 5-phase back EMF waveforms at 2000rpm are presented in
stainless steel. Fig.12 which verified that the desig gned flux density in the air
All the remaining components including the housing, two gap was reached and the windings werew correctly constructed.
end plates and the resolver housing are show wn in Fig.11(c).A There should be two pulses in one mechanical
m revolution due to
special feature of the BLDC is that the cold Skydrol oil is fed the two pole pairs in the BLDC motor.
m It can be seen from
from the pump along the shaft through ten holles in the housing Fig.12, there are two pulses in 30m ms which conformed to the
and back to the reservoir. Owing to the methood of cooling with 2000rpm operation. The average vaalue of the flat top area is
the Skydrol oil, the radial fins are designed to accommodate the 27.5V. Compared to the simulation result
r of 28.7V, it is 4.12%
hydraulic system losses as well as the motor loosses as shown in less. The reason is the unexpected d large voltage dip in the
Fig.11(d). middle of the flat top area which is caused
c by the gaps between
the PMs and the slot opening. This voltage
v dip also introduces
some undesirable torque ripple.
50

-50
50 0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025 0
0.03 0.035 0.04 0.045 0.05

-50
50 0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025 0
0.03 0.035 0.04 0.045 0.05
Back emf (V)

0
(a) stator (b) shaft, rotorr with magnets -50
50 0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025 0
0.03 0.035 0.04 0.045 0.05

-50
50 0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025 0
0.03 0.035 0.04 0.045 0.05

-50
0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025 0.03
0 0.035 0.04 0.045 0.05
Time (s)

Fig. 12. 5-Phase back emf wav

veforms at 2000rpm

B. Motor Losses Determination

(c) housing and end plates (d) assembleed BLDC motor
Fig. 11. BLDC Motor Prototypee
1)Iron losses (stator iron, sleeve can, rotor and shaft, and the
PMs losses): It is difficult to separaate the stator iron loss with
the sleeve can, rotor, shaft and the PMs losses because they are
all generated by the same source. Du uring the test, they were all
considered as one iron loss, which can be obtained from the

1156
open circuit test results. In the BLDC motor, the flux density is The tested losses are greater than the predicted losses
mainly determined by the PMs. Thus once the motor was because the viscosity of the Skydrol is sensitive to temperature.
constructed, the iron losses mainly varied with the speed of the The viscosity at 20˚C was used in the predicted losses. The
motor. Consequently, the iron losses cannot be separated from actual room temperature during the test was 17.2˚C which will
the friction and windage losses as in an induction motor. The increase the viscosity of the fluid and lead to a larger viscous
mechanical power of the BLDC motor driven by an AC motor loss. Furthermore, the measured power loss should be greater
at different speeds without the Skydrol immersion were than the predicted loss because the prediction only deals with
recorded as shown in Fig.13. These included the iron losses, fluid in the air gap and ignores the ends of the rotor, the shaft
friction and windage losses. The losses, as expected increase and the loss in the Skydrol flooded bearings. Overall, the
more rapidly as the speed increases. predicted hydraulic loss can be seen to be in very good
Tested Iron losses+friction and windage losses
Predicted Stator iron loss
agreement with the experimental measurements.
Predicted Sleeve can loss It is clear however, that loss prediction is in close agreement
Predicted Rotor & shaft loss
Predicted PMs loss with experimental results though in all cases the losses are
350
Predicted Iron losses( stator iron+ sleeve can + PMs+ rotor & shaft losses)
slightly underestimated. The tendency of the losses to increase
300 with speed was as expected. Most significant is the extra stator
250 conductor loss on full load. However, a good safety margin was
left for the thermal design. The actual maximum temperature
Loss (W)

200

150
100
50
0 for underestimation of temperatures, cooling and pump losses.
0 2000 4000 6000 8000
Speed (rpm)
Fig. 13. Tested iron losses, windage and friction losses
It can be seen from the figure that the tested loss is greater
than the predicted loss. This is mainly because of the difficulty
in predicting the stator core loss accurately. The rotor and shaft
losses are very small compared to other losses. However, the
predicted losses do not include the bearing losses, which are not
insignificant. Overall therefore the agreement is very good
between prediction and measurement.
It should be noted that the rotor and shaft losses, the retaining
can and the PM losses both as tested here and as predicted are
lower than for the fully loaded situation because there is no
commutation of the current during the test. However, from the
rise predicted was 30˚C with a 20˚C margin left. The new actual
power loss estimates suggest that 7˚C to 8˚C of the 20˚C margin
is consumed in the extra loss which still leaves a safety margin
10000 12000 14000
It can be therefore seen that the BLDC motor is capable of
providing the designed performance.
C. Operation with Single Phase Open Circuit
The single phase open circuit test was done in order to prove
the fault tolerant capability of the motor. The 5-phase current
waveforms at 2000rpm, 3 N.m under normal conditions are
shown in Fig.15. The current reference per phase is 11.33A.
The 5-phase current waveforms when phase B is open circuit is
shown in Fig.16. One can see that the faulty phase has no
impact on other healthy phases. The current reference per phase
was increased to deliver the same torque level.
Iref
Iact
20
Phase E Phase D Phase C Phase B Phase A

10
simulated results described above, large power loss pulses 0
during commutation would be expected at commutation, which 20 0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025 0.03 0.035 0.04 0.045 0.05
10
will increase the average losses above those measured. 0
2)Fluid viscous loss: The mechanical input power in the 20 0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025 0.03 0.035 0.04 0.045 0.05
10
open circuit test with Skydrol immersion includes the viscous 0
loss, iron losses and friction and windage loss. As a 20 0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025 0.03 0.035 0.04 0.045 0.05

consequence, the viscous loss could be found by subtracting no 10

0
load mechanical losses for the non immersed condition from 20 0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025 0.03 0.035 0.04 0.045 0.05

the immersed condition. The results were compared to the 10

predicted viscous hydraulic loss in Fig.14. 0

Rotor Position

400 0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025 0.03 0.035 0.04 0.045 0.05
200
Measured viscous loss Predicted viscous loss
0
0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025 0.03 0.035 0.04 0.045 0.05
1000
Time(s)
900
800 Fig.15. 5-phase current waveforms at 2000rpm, 3N.m under healthy condition
Viscous Loss (W)

700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000
Speed (rpm)

Fig.14. Comparison of tested and predicted viscous loss

1157
 Iref Converter for Brushless DC Drives,” IEEE International Symposium on
20 Iact
Industrial Electronics, June 2000
Phase E Phase D Phase C Phase B Phase A 10
[7] C. B. Jacobina, I. S. Freitas, T. M. Oliveira, E. R. C. da Silva, and A. M.
0
20 0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025 0.03 0.035 0.04 0.045 0.05 N. Lima, “Fault tolerant control of five-phase AC motor drive, ” in Conf.
10 Rec. IEEE PESC Conference, vol. 5, pp. 3486-3492, 2004.
0 [8] T. Gopalarathnam, H. A. Toliyat, and J. C. Moreira, “Multi-phase
20 0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025 0.03 0.035 0.04 0.045 0.05
10
fault-tolerant brushless DC motor drives, ” in Conf. Rec. IEEE IAS Annu.
Meeting, vol. 3, pp. 1683-1688, 2000.
0
20 0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025 0.03 0.035 0.04 0.045 0.05
[9] E. Levi, “Multiphase electric machines for variable-speed applications,”
10 IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 55, no. 5, pp. 1893–1909, May 2008.
0
20 0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025 0.03 0.035 0.04 0.045 0.05
10
0
Rotor Position

400 0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025 0.03 0.035 0.04 0.045 0.05
200
0
0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025 0.03 0.035 0.04 0.045 0.05
Time(s)

Fig.16 5-phase current waveforms at 2000rpm, 3N.m under single phase open
circuit condition

VII. CONCLUSION
A 12kW, 12000rpm, 5-phase, 4-pole BLDC motor was
designed and manufactured for the EHA application. The
performance of the motor was determined by magnetic circuit
analysis and then FEM simulation. Although the motor
performance in terms of torque per unit volume is sacrificed
partly for the aerospace reliability requirements and partly for
the SSMC limitations, the motor provides, in conjunction with
the SSMC, a highly fault tolerant motor system. Important
design features based on the FEM simulation results include the
80˚ arc PMs. These are a compromise between considerations
of cogging torque and the commutation torque ripple.
The thermal design of the motor has been developed using
Motorcad. Even when the motor operates at the maximum
ambient temperature, the steady state temperature will be
within the limit set by the Skydrol. It should be noted that the
motor dimensions have been optimized but the size and volume
of the housing, particularly the cooling fins accounted for a
large proportion of the whole assembled motor. Further
research into improved heat dissipation and more accurate
estimation of the hydraulic pump losses considering the sizes of
the heat dissipation components would be useful.

REFERENCES
[1] L. Botten, C. R. Whitley, and A. D. King, “Flight Control Actuation
Technology for Next-Generation All-Electric Aircraft, ” Technology
Review Journal, Fall/Winter 2000.
[2] P. M. Churn, C. J. Maxwell, N. Schofield, D. Howe, and D. J. Powell,
“Electro-hydraulic actuation of primary flight control surfaces, ” IEE
Colloquium on All Electric Aircraft, pp. 3/1-3/5, 1998.
[3] P. W. Wheeler, L. Empringham, M. Apap, L. de Lilo, J. C. Clare, and K.
J. Bradley, “A matrix converter motor drive for an aircraft actuation
system, ” in Proc. Power Electronics and Applications, EPE Conference,
pp. 472–481,2003.
[4] P. A. Robson, K. J. Bradley, P. Wheeler, J. Clare, L. de Lillo, C. Gerada,
S. J. Pickering, D. Lampard, C. K. Goh, G. Towers, and C. Whitley, “The
impact of matrix converter technology on motor design for an integrated
flight control surface actuation system, ” in Conf. Rec. IEMDC
Conference, vol. 2, pp. 1321-1327, 2003.
[5] X. Huang, K. Bradley, A. Goodman, C. Gerada, P. Wheeler, J. Clare, and
C. Whitley, “Fault-tolerant brushless DC motor drive for
electrohydrostatic actuation system in aerospace application,” in Conf.
Rec. IEEE IAS Annu. Meeting, vol. 1, pp. 473–480, Oct. 2006.
[6] X. Huang, K. Bradley, A. Goodman, C. Gerada, P. Wheeler, J. Clare, and
C. Whitley,”Fault-Tolerant Analysis of Multi-Phase Single Sided Matrix

1158