Live data from Hacker News

Electric motors with no rare earths

renaultgroup.com

71–80 of 231 posts

Re: Electric motors with no rare earths

#71
post #52
post #43

Does regenerative braking work with a motor like this?

Yes: IIRC some large generators work exactly like this, as the energized rotor gives a lot more flexibility in managing frequency and power output.

Not just some, approximately all of them. It greatly complicates the logistics of a black start. † Of course that situation has additional complexity due to the need for substantial additional power in order for the various fuel supply systems to operate but I digress.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_start

Re: Electric motors with no rare earths

#72
post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lack of wear components. A permanent magnet motor uses permanent magnets on the rotor, but an electrically excited synchronous motor has an electromagnet on the rotor. This requires a rotating electrical contact which has normally been made with slip rings and carbon brushes. These wear over time and need replacement. Most large electric generators are externally excited synchronous generators using carbon slip rin…

To a layman that seems like a really small efficiency tax if you can't get your hands on the magnets for some reason.

It's a small difference, but if you had a choice between "more efficient AND less maintenance" and "less efficient and more maintenance" then it's easy to see why the permanent-magnet solution is preferred.

Re: Electric motors with no rare earths

#74
post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lack of wear components. A permanent magnet motor uses permanent magnets on the rotor, but an electrically excited synchronous motor has an electromagnet on the rotor. This requires a rotating electrical contact which has normally been made with slip rings and carbon brushes. These wear over time and need replacement. Most large electric generators are externally excited synchronous generators using carbon slip rin…

To a layman that seems like a really small efficiency tax if you can't get your hands on the magnets for some reason.

It’s a near-doubling of energy loss - probably a healthier way to understand it when the efficiencies are all 90%+

Re: Electric motors with no rare earths

#75
post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To a layman that seems like a really small efficiency tax if you can't get your hands on the magnets for some reason.

It's a small difference, but if you had a choice between "more efficient AND less maintenance" and "less efficient and more maintenance" then it's easy to see why the permanent-magnet solution is preferred.

The actual alternative is induction motors, which are just a bit less efficient than PMSM and otherwise basically the same. Except that the frequency fed to them isn't exactly proportional to speed.

They've been used to great success since we had the needed power electronics to drive the electric trains of Europe.

Re: Electric motors with no rare earths

#76
post #32

It's interesting that this is a brushed design. In the RC car community, brushless motors are generally regarded as superior, but those of course have the rare earth magnet problem. Technically the brushes can wear out, although there are claims they are good for 150,000-250,000 miles it seems.

"Brushless DC motors" are good because brushed DC motors are constantly switching polarity, which causes arcing of the brushes, which causes wear. The brushes are not there to energize the rotor; the rotor is just magnets after all. The brushes are there to tell the stator to change polarity.

Brushless DC motors don't arc -- because they switch stator polarity with electronics that sense the position of the rotor without rubbing parts. (They can also fine-tune the stator current spikes to make the motor very efficient over a wide speed range, which brushed DC motors cannot do.) The lack of arcing is more important than the fact that they don't have rotating contact points.

Brushed AC motors have rotating contact points (slip rings) but they don't arc (ideally), so the contact points don't degrade as fast as brushed DC motors do. But they do carry a lot of current because their purpose is to energize the rotor. Brushed AC motors are not ideal, but making an AC motor "brushless" is not nearly as big a win as making a DC motor brushless.

Wait. You're saying DC motors require current that's constantly switching polarity? So they're sort of really AC internally?

Yep. All motors require constantly changing current. The distinction between AC and DC motors is whether you feed the motor externally with current that is already alternating sinusoidally, or whether the motor itself turns external DC into some kind of AC.

Re: Electric motors with no rare earths

#77
post #16
post #7

[flagged]

Also known as: “we removed the rare earths and added software.”

Rare earth magnet motors require software too if you want them to be maximally efficient. You could embody that software in e.g. an FPGA of course, but it's still software.

Re: Electric motors with no rare earths

#78
post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lack of wear components. A permanent magnet motor uses permanent magnets on the rotor, but an electrically excited synchronous motor has an electromagnet on the rotor. This requires a rotating electrical contact which has normally been made with slip rings and carbon brushes. These wear over time and need replacement. Most large electric generators are externally excited synchronous generators using carbon slip rin…

To a layman that seems like a really small efficiency tax if you can't get your hands on the magnets for some reason.

You can get about 2/3 as much output power for a given amount of waste heat and cooling capacity.

It's like how laptop power bricks used to be big and get hot, and now they aren't and don't.

Re: Electric motors with no rare earths

#79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The cheapest EV model Renault sells is around €20K, the cheapest BMW EV is around €65K. It's safe to say the companies are not in the market bracket, no?

The bit the gets me more than the sale price is servicing. BMWs have a terrible record for needing expensive repairs. I know you shouldn’t rely on anecdote, but it seems I do.

If you take care of the car it’s just brake pads, tires, rotors. Pads and rotors are really simple to DIY. Tires are more expensive than like… an Elantra, but if you’re buying a 60k car you can afford 1.2k in tires… otherwise don’t buy the car.

If you get into an accident or let the bmw get into disrepair via neglect, yeah it’s not cheap to clean up. Body work is expensive on any car though, and I don’t have sympathy for people who own higher-end cars and don’t take care of them, they deserve to pay the price for it.

Post reply on HN