We know that High torque needs rare earthsWhat if we remove them completely?
- Murali krishna
- Apr 30
- 1 min read
We know that High torque needs rare earths
What if we remove them completely?
Yes, this Axial SynRM looks practical 👇
In my motor development experience,
 Material cost always becomes a bottleneck.
I was reading about the NAFTech project.
Typical PMSM uses 20–30% magnet cost.
 Their SynRM reduces this to near zero.
First, why and what is a rare earth?
Like neodymium and dysprosium.
They give high magnetic strength.
But prices are volatile.
Supply chains are concentrated globally.
They target a magnet-free traction motor.
No rare earth magnets inside.
Rare earth magnets give high torque density.
Torque density means torque per volume.
More torque in less space.
Axial flux motors already achieve this.
They are compact and efficient.
Pros of axial flux motors:
High torque density.
Short axial length packaging.
Cons I see:
Heavy rare earth dependence.
Complex cooling and manufacturing.
Now comes SynRM.
Synchronous Reluctance Machine.
Torque from magnetic reluctance difference.
So what is AF-SynRM?
Axial flux synchronous reluctance motor.
It mixes both advantages.
Axial compactness plus magnet-free design.
Radial SynRM avoids magnets.
But needs more installation space.
NAFTech proposes axial SynRM.
Magnet-free motors can reduce dependency
Combine compactness with a magnet-free design.
Less exposure to volatile magnet prices. 🌍
As someone in motor development,
This direction feels practical.
If AF SynRM matches torque density,
will PMSM still dominate EV traction?
Where will AF-SynRM fit first?
 Two-wheelers? Commercial EVs?
🔔 Follow me on Linkedin for insights on EV technology, electric motors & Tech.
🔥 Get EV updates directly on WhatsApp – join 600+ engineers: [Click here]
Original post on my Linkedin - Click hereÂ
Source: Aachen University
Comments