Eomys / pyleecan

Electrical engineering open-source software providing a user-friendly, unified, flexible simulation framework for the multiphysic design and optimization of electrical machines and drives
https://www.pyleecan.org
Apache License 2.0
154 stars 128 forks source link

[CO] More flexibilty for Machine / Lamination combinaison #398

Open BonneelP opened 3 years ago

BonneelP commented 3 years ago

Hello all,

We would like to simulate a MachineIPMSM with a LamSlotMulti (+ winding) on the stator. The issue is that for now the Machine class definition is strict: MachineIPMSM needs a LamSlotWind as a stator. So the question would be how should we add more flexibility to this ? For now I see two options:

On a side note, we should maybe take the opportunity to consider that we may want to alter the "normal" behaviour of the machine to check some effect on simpler structure. Yes I'm thinking about Slotless_CEFC.json (used in Tests/Validation/Magnetics/test_FEMM_slotless.py) which should have a Lamination object as a stator but we use a stator with Zs=0 and a winding without conductor to "convert LamSlotWind to Lamination" which is not really clean. Then solution one would be better in this case.

We can also consider that LamSlotMag was reorganized in #283 from list of magnet to a single magnet and that the list version will be added back one day (I realize that we could have LamSlotMagMulti and LamSlotMultiMag as two different kind of Lamination).

I'm sure that we already talk about this topic but I can't find the corresponding issue / discussion :/ Any feedback or insight on which solution to choose (or maybe a third solution) would be welcomed :)

Best regards, Pierre

BonneelP commented 3 years ago

mostly solved in #399 I close the issue for now but some aspect of this issue may need further investigation later on.