I am still wedded to the 32-pole/16:1 gearing of Plan-D and do not wish to part with much of the research. Plan-D in brief:
- 32 Poles / 16:1
- 30 Teeth / 10 teeth per phase
- Magnet length = 20 mm (preferential designs for both 4 and 5 mm)
- Each Copper winding is 3 mm wide x 33 turns
- r = 90 mm / 0.090 m.
- F = Ãâ€ž / r = 33.9 / 0.090 m = 377 N
- Layout A: Plan-D (Halbach illustrated simply with 2-magnets per pole).
- Layout B: Displays the use of 1.0 x 0.5-inch wide bar magnets with a small air gap in-between at the ID.
- Layout C: Same as B except 2.0 x 0.5-inch wide bar magnets with a small air gap in-between at the ID.
- The Yellow circle is the OD of a Nine Continent 280X hub motor for reference. Note that A & B fit neatly within the physical limits (as per design), whereas with C the actual finished assembly will increase the diameter from roughly 8 inches to nearly 10.
- Because we are not using Halbach arrangements it is presumed that we must increase other physical quotients to make up for the deficiency. I took the liberty of drawing the length of the magnets of A across B & C for reference (two red lines).
- Though B offers slightly longer lengths the Torque-arm is smaller and the magnets would need to be taller than 5 mm. The fact is I would not consider magnets less than Â¼ inch (6.35 mm) high.
- Layout C is better suited in that the average Torque-arm is essentially the same as in Plan-D, although the magnet length is larger and the goal of creating a motor smaller than a 9C would not be met.
- There are shorter magnets; I can source 1.5-inch long magnets however that particular manufacturer has different heights and Gauss strengths.
- As an alternative (not shown), use the 1.0-inch long magnets at the same Torque-arm radius as Plan-D and just move on.
Clearly there are many factors we could play with. FEMM studies shortly.