Design of a Carbon Fiber Rotor in a Dual Rotor Axial

Flux Motor for Electric Aircraft

Chase Wiley Dorsa Talebi Sri Vignesh Sankarraman
Department of Aerospace Engineering Department of Electrical Engineering Department of Electrical Engineering
Texas A&M University Texas A&M University University of Texas at Dallas
College Station, TX, USA College Station, TX, USA Richardson, TX, USA
[email protected] [email protected] [email protected]

Matthew C. Gardner Moble Benedict

Department of Electrical Engineering Department of Aerospace Engineering
University of Texas at Dallas Texas A&M University
Richardson, TX, USA College Station, TX, USA
[email protected] [email protected]

Abstract—Due to the interest in electrifying aviation, a study on

the electromagnetic and structural design space of a 250 kW dual
rotor axial flux electric motor is presented. For commercial
viability, the powertrain must have a high specific power, so the
entire motor must be as lightweight as possible. The structural
design utilizes carbon fiber reinforced polymers (CFRP), which are
extensively being used in the aerospace industry for its high-
strength, high-stiffness, and low density. The paper presents three
separate structural configurations achieving certain relevant
performance criteria for the rotor with increasing complexity, and
the mass of these CFRP configurations are compared with each
other. By taking advantage of the CFRP’s anisotropy and
appropriately distributing the CFRP mass, the structural mass can
be reduced by 59% relative to a solid disk. Then, the pareto Fig. 1. Electromagnetically active portion of the proposed electric motor
frontiers of the carbon fiber designs will be compared with that of
aluminum and titanium structural designs to highlight the mass electrical steel, can be used to achieve high power density [2]
reduction benefits. The optimal CFRP structure has about half the and efficiency [3]. The PM pieces on the rotor are segmented in
mass of the optimal aluminum or titanium designs. Finally, a co- a Halbach array, which enables the design to replace the rotor
optimization study between electromagnetically active components back irons with a lightweight nonmagnetic material. However,
and sufficient structure support is given. this lightweight material must also be strong enough to support
the axial forces on the rotor.
Keywords—Electric aviation, carbon fiber, rotor, axial flux,
electric motor, decarbonization, optimization Aluminum, carbon fiber, and titanium are often used in
lightweight electric motors. Due to aluminum’s low density and
I. INTRODUCTION high conductivity, aluminum conductors serve as an alternative
to copper conductors in lightweight applications [4]. On the
To decarbonize the aviation sectors, the US Advanced
other hand, carbon fiber and titanium are much less conductive
Research Projects Agency-Energy (ARPA-E) created the
but have gained traction for wraps/sleeves in traction motor
aviation-class synergistically cooled electric motors with
rotors, due to their high strengths [5]. Aluminum’s high
integrated drives (ASCEND) program. ASCEND aims to
conductivity limits its use as a structural material in
develop a lightweight, highly efficient electric powertrain for
electromagnetically active sections of the motor, as it is prone to
commercial aircraft propulsion. ARPA-E determined that for the
eddy current losses. Nonetheless, aluminum can be used as a
electric powertrain to be commercially viable for a narrow-body
structural material where there is little variation in the magnetic
commercial airliner with similar performance to currently
field, such as in the rotor [6] or the frame of the motor [7]. On
operating aircrafts, the system must be at least 93% efficient
the other hand, carbon fiber reinforced polymers (CFRPs) have
with ≥12 kW/kg specific power [1], which is a few times higher
low conductivity and can be used in both rotor and stator support
than state-of-the-art electric motors for aircraft [1]. For this
structures [8] to reduce eddy current losses. In magnetic gears,
project, an axial flux dual rotor permanent magnet (PM) electric
CFRPs have been used as support material [9]. Titanium has
motor is selected [2]. In this dual rotor topology (Fig. 1), grain-
more conductivity than CFRP and, hence, cannot be used as a
oriented electrical steel (GOES), rather than non-oriented

This work was supported in part by the U.S. Department of Energy under
Award Number DE-AR0001356.
© 2022 IEEE
 TABLE I. MECHANICAL PROPERTIES OF ALUMINUM, TITANIUM, AND IM7/8552 UNIDIRECTIONAL COMPOSITE
Young’s Modulus Failure Strength Specific Stiffness Specific Strength
Material Density (g/cm3)
(GPa) (MPa) (GPa/(g/cm3)) (MPa/(g/cm3))
Aluminum 6061-T6 2.71 68.3 234 25.2 86.3
Titanium Ti-6Al-4V 4.43 110 869 24.8 196
CFRP:IM7/8552 (Unidirectional) 1.55 171 2326 110 1500

support structure as easily as CFRP, but some applications

employ titanium alloy as a support material [8], [10].
In aerospace applications, it is often the goal to create
structures and key components with minimal mass. Advances in
materials science have helped create aircraft with higher
performance and more payload capability and, most recently,
have enabled entire new industries such as electric aviation. In
the past few decades, two classes of metallics have dominated
much of the aircraft design - aluminum and titanium. Many
alloys of these materials have been created, and more will likely
continue to be made to further the state of the art. In this paper,
two particular aluminum and titanium alloys, which find
extensive use in the aerospace industry, were chosen: aluminum
2024-T3 and Ti-4V-6Al. While these alloys generally do well Fig. 2. Axial rotor force, electromagnetically active mass, and takeoff
and represent the performance capabilities of these material electromagnetic efficiency of the best points in the electromagnetic design sweep
classes, there are likely other alloys which may better suit TABLE II. MECHANICAL PROPERTIES OF ALUMINUM, TITANIUM, AND IM7/8552
specific applications. Today, CFRPs are replacing many UNIDIRECTIONAL COMPOSITE
metallic structures in aircraft [11]. Table I lists typical Parameter Values
mechanical properties for these materials [12], [13]. As shown
Peak takeoff power (kW) 250
in Table I, CFRPs outperform metals, due to their high stiffness,
high strengths, and low density. Note that the failure strength Cruise power (kW) 83
values given are based on yield strength for Aluminum, and Takeoff speed (RPM) 5000
ultimate strength for Titanium and IM7/8552 since these tend to
be brittle. Thus, conventional combustion aircraft engines that Cruise speed (RPM) 4000
are in use today are tending to move towards more weight Pole pairs 20
efficient composite materials as in the case of the Boeing 787
Number of stator teeth 42
[14]. However, the relatively low maximum service temperature
of composites is a key limitation in combustion powertrains Rotor magnet outer diameter (cm) 27
since turbine combustion chamber can exceed 1000 °C, but, for Rotor magnet inner diameter (cm) 22
the proposed electric motor, the rotor temperatures are not
expected to exceed 100 °C. This enables the thorough use of Magnet thickness 1
carbon fiber composites in the rotors, facilitating extreme mass
reduction, and further highlighting the competitive advantage of
electric powertrains over conventional combustion engines in support. In [2], the axial force was strongly correlated to the
aerospace applications. magnet thickness and the airgap surface area. Based on the
results of the initial electromagnetic analysis, the indicated point
In the following sections, initial electromagnetic and in Fig. 2 was selected as a baseline for the structural design. Fig.
mechanical designs are explored. For the mechanical design, 1 illustrates the electromagnetically active portions of the
designs with carbon fiber polymers are optimized and compared selected baseline design, and Table II summarizes the motor
against optimized designs using aluminum or titanium for the design parameters.
rotor structure. Based on the lessons learned from the initial
designs, the electromagnetic and structural designs are co- III. STRUCTURAL DESIGN WITH CARBON FIBER COMPOSITES
optimized to yield the global optimal design. Unlike metals, CFRP is anisotropic, which means that its
material properties vary depending on the orientation of fibers.
II. ELECTROMAGNETIC DESIGN Fig. 3 shows the direction-1 runs parallel to the fibers and
Ref. [2] describes the initial electromagnetic design sweep direction-2 runs perpendicular to the fibers. The mechanical
for characterizing the electromagnetic performance in terms of properties with respect to these two directions are the elastic
the interfacial parameters with other subsystems, such as the Young’s moduli E1, E2, the shear modulus G12, and the Poisson
inverter, structure, and thermal management system. Fig. 2 ratio ν12. E1 is typically much higher than E2, and an example
shows the takeoff efficiency (considering only DC copper losses of properties for the IM7/8552 composite can be seen in Table
and core losses) and electromagnetically (EM) active mass for III [13]. Comparing these values with those of the isotropic
the best designs that achieve the required torque (480 Nm). Fig. aluminum and titanium alloys shows a fundamental difference
2 also shows the axial forces that the rotor structure must in how the materials behave and opens up many new design
possibilities in achieving the required structural performance.
 Fig. 4. Electromagnetic axial load on rotor structures
Fig. 3: Composite plate with material axes shown. 1 runs parallel to the fibers, 2
runs transverse to the fibers.
The laminate stacking sequence dictates how the plies
should be oriented and in what order. For example, a sequence
Due to the large attractive forces between the rotor magnets of [0,45,90] would consist of 3 plies stacked with fiber
and the stator, the rotor structure for this electromagnetic orientations of 0°, then 45°, then 90° relative to a reference axis.
configuration must support a strong distributed axial force. At a The choice of laminate stacking sequence has a direct and strong
nominal one-side air gap distance of 1.25 mm, a total magnitude impact on the performance of the structure, as this affects the
of 5.75 kN acts on the magnets and rotor structure as shown in structure’s mechanical properties. A quasi-isotropic symmetric
Fig. 4. For an axial flux motor, the resulting rotor structure laminate stacking sequence ensures in-plane mechanical
deflections reduce the airgap and further increase the axial properties (E1, G12, etc.) are constant in all planar directions.
forces, as these forces are inversely related to distance. A The initial and most basic choice of structure would be a solid
functional rotor structure design must be stiff enough that a disk consisting of a quasi-isotropic layup. Fig. 5 shows the plot
maximum deflection is not exceeded; otherwise, the air gap of overall mass vs maximum deflection experienced for the solid
could close entirely and cause a catastrophic failure during disk structure with varying thickness, based on ABAQUS FEA.
operation. Because the load is out of the plane, the structure To maintain a deflection no larger than 0.3 mm, the optimal solid
undergoes bending and careful attention must be paid to ensure quasi-isotropic disk requires 1000 g.
the structure deflects minimally and evenly along the outer
circumference. Once the baseline deflection and optimal mass of the solid
disk structure is obtained, mass can be strategically relocated to
When designing any component, certain constraints are increase the bending inertia. An example of this process is by
given (geometric, performance, etc.), which the structure needs “cutting out” 8 spokes of material and re-applying that mass as
to satisfy. Furthermore, in the design of lightweight components, added thickness to the design as seen in Fig. 6. This results in a
the structure not only needs to satisfy constraints but also be stiffer structure for the same mass. Since composite structures
competitive with mass. In the field of optimization, this is benefit the most from continuous fibers, it is useful to employ a
typically referred to as the cost function, and it is sought to laminate stacking sequence which contains plies that only run in
minimize this value. To find the best possible design (which the direction of a spoke, hence [0,90,45,-45]4,S in this case.
minimizes the cost function), an optimization algorithm is Weight optimal components were then obtained using a genetic
typically used. A genetic algorithm script created in the Python algorithm optimization script coupled with ABAQUS FEA. For
language was employed with finite element analysis (FEA) in a deflection of 0.3 mm, the best possible mass obtained was 941
ABAQUS to find the minimum mass designs that satisfy a given grams with this structure, which is 6% lighter than the solid disk
deflection constraint. In this case, the rotor structures are not with the same deflection.
allowed to deflect more than 0.3 mm.
In designing structures with metallics, once a material is
chosen upon, the design variables are typically only geometrical.
However, with CFRPs, even after a material is chosen it is not
enough to consider only geometric variables in the design space.
One must also consider the laminate stacking sequence, as well.

TABLE III: IM7/8552 MECHANICAL PROPERTIES

Density (g/cc) 1.55
E1 (GPa) 171.4
E2 (GPa) 9.08
G12 (GPa) 5.29
ν12 0.32
ν23 0.4

Fig. 5. Solid disk mass vs deflection

Fig. 6. Example of the spoke shaped cutouts on the rotor disk structure
Fig. 8. Rotor disk design with unidirectional box spokes

maximize bending stiffness. For a structure with the same

deflection as the original 941 g quasi-isotropic disk, this new
configuration yields a 406 g structure after optimization.
IV. OPTIMAL STRUCTURAL DESIGN WITH METALLICS AND
COMPARISONS
Using the same methodology in determining the optimal
composite structure, optimal aluminum and titanium rotor
structures are found using the mechanical properties given in
Table I. One critical thing to note is that while static structural
studies are being performed to determine axial deflections in
finding the best design, it is important to remember that this
structure will undergo rotations and, thus, will apply a large
centripetal force to the magnets. To sufficiently support these
forces, a minimum sizing of the retaining ring wall thickness is
needed depending on the material used. Given that a failure of
the retaining ring will result in catastrophic destruction of the
motor, a large safety factor was applied to the material strengths
given in Table I and are identified in Table IV. A value of 3 was
Fig. 7. Rotor disk decomposition with mass percentage for each section applied to Aluminum’s yield strength, while 4 was applied to
Titanium and IM7/8552’s ultimate strength. With a given design
A quasi-isotropic structure fails to take advantage of the rotation of 5000 RPM, the corresponding magnet masses of
anisotropy of CFRPs. Fig. 7 shows the structure given in Fig. 6 1443 grams per rotor, and conservatively using the radial
decomposed into three main sections with their corresponding distance from the center of rotation to the furthest point of the
mass percentage: 1) the magnet mounting disk, 2) the spokes, magnets at 135 mm, an estimate of the total centripetal force
and 3) the root. The magnet mounting disk simply holds the experienced is 53.5 kN. By dividing this value by the outer
magnets, the spokes transfer the load to the root, and the root circumference, the edge loading is 63 kN/m. If this loading is
transfers loads to the shaft while providing a stable root treated as applying an internal pressure to a thin ring, then the
condition. The magnet mounting disk has the largest area and hoop stress can be found and used to help determine the
accounts for most of the mass, despite least affecting the overall minimum thickness necessary for the retaining ring. The
structural deflections due to being the furthest from the root.
Therefore, the previous quasi-isotropic rotor disk portion of the TABLE IV: RETAINING RING SIZING BY MATERIAL
design was discarded in favor of an assembly with 3 unique Strength Design Strength
Minimum
components as seen in Fig. 8. This allows parts which minimally Material Thickness
Safety Factor (MPa)
(mm)
affect the overall deflection reduction to have low mass while Al 2024-T3 3 75 11.34
also introducing unidirectional box beams along the spokes to Ti-6Al-4V 4 195 4.36
IM7/8552 4 582 1.46
pressure is found by distributing the edge load across the height TABLE V: OPTIMAL STRUCTURE MASS BY MATERIAL
of the magnets, in this case 10 mm, which computes to a pressure Material Optimal Mass (g)
of 6.3 MPa. Calculating the minimum ring thickness using the IM7/8552 406
Al 2024-T3 831
formula for hoop stress yields the values are tabulated in Table Ti-6Al-4V 819
IV. These retaining ring thickness values were enforced on each Hybrid 600
optimization study as a minimum design variable bound. Note
that in the case of the composite, this is the minimum thickness
of unidirectional plies needed. A good composite design would material). The new studies basically involved small
also incorporate about 25% of off-axis plies, so in this study perturbations of the design parameters around the initial baseline
analysis was performed with a minimum 2mm thick retaining design. Fig. 10 shows the efficiency, total active mass, and no
ring composed of 1.5 mm of unidirectional and 0.5mm of off- load rotor axial force of the best 21 designs resulting from this
axis plies. Additionally, the same optimization study was study and the baseline design selected from the previous study.
performed on a “hybrid” design which used an aluminum rotor Some of these designs have a larger outer diameter with a shorter
structure with a CFRP retaining ring. The generated pareto stack which results in a higher torque per amp coefficient due to
frontiers are given in Fig. 9. For a performance target of 0.3 mm a larger torque arm. The parameters of the rotor PMs for these
axial deflection, the following optimal masses are given in Table new cases can be divided into the configurations listed in Table
V. VI; these dimensional parameters, together with the axial force
on the rotor are key parameters that determine the mass of the
V. ELECTROMAGNETIC AND STRUCTURAL CO- rotor structure. Thus, further analysis of the new designs
OPTIMIZATION regarding the structural system is crucial since increasing the
Performing a new set of electromagnetic parametric sweep outer diameter or the axial force increases the structural mass, as
studies introduces lighter active material designs with higher shown in Fig 11. Configuration 1, which has the smallest outer
efficiency (accounting all the DC and AC losses in the active

Fig. 9. Pareto frontiers of rotor structure masses vs deflections for 4 material choices
 diameter considered, shows a clear advantage for minimizing
structural mass.
Combining these structural masses with that of the active
electromagnetic masses and plotting against axial force
experienced gives Fig. 12. Fig. 13 compares the total mass
between each design in bar chart format. Fig. 14 provides the
total mass, together with the efficiency and no-load axial force.
VI. CONCLUSIONS
This paper provides design of CFRP rotor structure support
for an axial flux dual rotor electric motor configuration aiming
an extreme lightweight powertrain system in aviation
application. As a starting point, the optimal electromagnetic
design from [2] is used and summarized in Table II. Using
IM7/8552 carbon fiber composite, three different structural
designs are mass optimized to prevent over 0.3mm of deflection
under a 5.75 kN axial force. The first, a solid disk with a quasi-
isotropic layup yielded a 1000 g design. Using a spoked design,
Fig. 10. Efficiency, total active mass, and no load axial force for new as given in Fig. 6, with a quasi-isotropic layup reduces the mass
electromagnetic configuration sweep
to 941 g. However, when using box beam spokes with a
unidirectional layup to leverage the anisotropy of the CFRP like
TABLE VI: ELECTROMAGNETIC CONFIGURATION PARAMETERS the design in Fig. 8, the optimal mass found is 406 g, which is a
Magnet Inner Magnet Outer Magnet 57% weight reduction. When applying the same optimization
Configuration
Radius (mm) Radius (mm) Length (mm) method to structures of Aluminum 2024-T3, Titanium 4V-6Al,
Original 110 135 10
1 105 135 8
and a hybrid with an aluminum structure and a carbon fiber
2 110 140 8 retaining ring, optimal masses of 831, 819, and 600 grams are
3 115 140 10 found, respectively. Thus, CFRPs can yield a significant
reduction in structural mass relative to metallics. However, this
benefit is only realized if the structural design takes advantage
of CFRP’s anisotropic properties.

Optimal Rotor Mass vs Axial Load for new EM configs

0.49

0.47
Optimized Rotor Mass (kg)

0.45

0.43
EM Config 1
EM Config 2
0.41
EM Config 3

0.39 Original EM Config

0.37

0.35
-6.600 -6.400 -6.200 -6.000 -5.800 -5.600 -5.400
Axial Force at No Load (kN)

Fig. 11. Mass optimal composite rotor structure masses vs axial load for new electromagnetic configurations
 Total Combined Mass vs Axial Load for new EM configs
8.9

Active EM Mass + Rotor Structural Mass (kg)

8.8

8.7

8.6
EM Config 1
8.5
EM Config 2
8.4
EM Config 3
8.3 Original EM Config

8.2

8.1
-6.600 -6.400 -6.200 -6.000 -5.800 -5.600 -5.400
Axial Force at No Load (kN)

Fig. 12. Combined electromagnetic and rotor structural masses vs axial forces for new electromagnetic configurations

Total Combined Mass vs Design

10

7
Total Mass (kg)

5
Rotor Mass
4
EM Mass
3

0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Design

Fig. 13. Bar graph showing combined electromagnetic and structural masses for each new configuration examined. Design 1 is the original design.

A new parametric sweep of the electromagnetic design was mass results, which shows an overall optimal mass configuration
performed, with 22 new design points generated and of 8.181 kg including the motor with the EM active material and
characterized in Fig. 10. From this, the same optimization the rotor structure. This is a reduction of 682 grams from the
method was performed using IM7/8552 CFRP on each new original 8.863 kg configuration.
configuration, with results given in Figs. 11-14. A clear trend
between increasing axial force and optimal mass is given in Fig.
11, when only considering rotor structure. However, when
electromagnetic masses are added, no such clear trend emerges
as seen in Fig. 12. Fig. 13 summarizes the combined optimal
 thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do
not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States
Government or any agency thereof.
REFERENCES
[1] “DE-FOA-0002238: Aviation-class synergistically cooled electric-motors
with integrated drives (ASCEND)”, Department of Energy, Advanced
Research Projects Agency Energy, Dec. 2019.
[2] D. Talebi, M. C. Gardner, S. V. Sankarraman, A. Daniar, and H. A. Toliyat,
“Electromagnetic Design Characterization of a Dual Rotor Axial Flux
Motor for Electric Aircraft,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Elect. Mach. and Drives
Conf., 2021, pp. 1-8.
[3] M. C. Gardner, Y. Zhang, D. Talebi, H. A. Toliyat, A. Crapo, P. Knauer,
and H. Willis, “Loss Breakdown of a Dual Conical Rotor Permanent
Magnet Motor using Grain Oriented Electrical Steel and Soft Magnetic
Composites,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Elect. Mach. and Drives Conf., 2019, pp
1067-1074.
[4] J. D. Widmer, C. M. Spargo, G. J. Atkinson, and B. C. Mecrow, "Solar
Plane Propulsion Motors With Precompressed Aluminum Stator
Windings," IEEE Trans. Energy Convers., vol. 29, no. 3, pp. 681-688,
Fig. 14. Combined structural and electromagnetic masses for the new Sept. 2014.
electromagnetic parameter sweep [5] K. Grace, S. Galioto, K. Bodla and A. M. El-Refaie, "Design and Testing
of a Carbon-Fiber-Wrapped Synchronous Reluctance Traction Motor,"
IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. 54, no. 5, pp. 4207-4217, Sept.-Oct. 2018.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT [6] J. Oyama, T. Higuchi, T. Abe and K. Tanaka, "The fundamental
Portions of this research were conducted with the advanced characteristics of novel switched reluctance motor with segment core
computing resources provided by Texas A&M High embedded in aluminum rotor block," in Proc. Int. Conf. Elect. Mach. Syst.,
2005, pp. 515-519.
Performance Research Computing. The authors would like to
[7] Regal Beloit, “Marathon Motors Catalog”, 2018.
thank ANSYS for their support of the EMPE lab through the
[8] Y. Wei, J. Bai, B. Yu, Z. Yin and P. Zheng, "Mover Optimization and
provision of FEA software. Mechanical Strength Analysis of a Tubular Permanent-Magnet Linear
This material is based upon work supported by the Motor," in Proc. Int. Conf. Elect. Mach. Syst, 2019, pp. 1-4.
Department of Energy under Award Number DE-AR0001356. [9] T. F. Tallerico, Z. A. Cameron and J. J. Scheidler, "Design of a Magnetic
Gear for NASA's Vertical Lift Quadrotor Concept Vehicle," in Proc.
This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an AIAA/IEEE Elect. Aircraft Technol. Symp., 2019, pp. 1-21.
agency of the United States Government. Neither the United
[10] Y. Yu et al., "Rotordynamic Assessment for an Inside Out, High Speed
States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their Permanent Magnet Synchronous Motor," in Proc. Int. Conf. Elect. Mach.,
employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes 2020, pp. 529-535.
any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, [11] G. Marsh, Airframers exploit composites in battle for supremacy,
completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, Reinforced Plastics, vol. 49, no. 3, pp. 26-32, 2005.
product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would [12] MMPDS-11: Metallic Materials Properties Development and
not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any Standardization (MMPDS). Federal Aviation Administration, 2016.
specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, [13] E. J. Barbaro, Introduction to Composite Materials Design, Taylor &
trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily Fancis Group, 2017.
constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or [14] S. F. Clark, “787 Propulsion System.” Boeing Aero Magazine, Boeing,
2012.
favoring by the United States Government or any agency