Parametric design / Gabizos R1

From constraints
to motor geometry.

A computational design pipeline for BLDC drone motors. Explore geometries, inspect their magnetic and mechanical limits, then confront the predictions with measurements.

The current release repairs the calculation and CAD pipeline. A new R2 candidate needs independent reference data before its performance can be assessed.

51.3 gR1 estimated mass
R1Current CAD release
0Independent references
Inspect the current revision

[ inverse design pipeline ]

Define requirements, calculate, explore, inspect CAD and compare independent measurements before redesign
  1. Requirements and constraints
  2. Magnetic model and losses
  3. Constrained exploration
  4. CAD generation and inspection
  5. Independent measurements, then the next iteration

[01] Magnetic circuit

Explicit magnet reluctance and physical air gap, with a nonlinear iron law. The current material curves and leakage factors are analytical assumptions.

Independent predictive accuracy is not established.

[02] Constrained exploration

Explore dimensions and winding choices against mass, current, slot fill and saturation limits. Numerical convergence and feasibility are checked separately.

A converged search can have no feasible design.

[03] Parametric CAD

Geometry produces STEP, STL and DXF files. R1 checks stator continuity and nominal component intersections.

Valid CAD still requires manufacturing and mechanical qualification.

[ exploration status ] bounded numerical check

The legacy optimization bounds were checked again after the review corrections. The recorded run used 24 candidates over 8 generations, with seed 42.

It produced 0 feasible candidates in 192 evaluations. This is a bounded check of those settings, not evidence that the entire design space is infeasible.

Preparing R2

Specify the winding, connection, electrical waveform and load case. Identify material and loss data, compare back-EMF and resistance with an independent reference, then revisit the search bounds.

No current Pareto frontier or new qualified motor is claimed.

[ verification and evidence ]

Software and geometry

292 / 292 recorded software tests passed.

Report recorded at 2026-10-22T10:34:39 (report clock). These checks cover program behavior and numerical invariants. They do not measure motor performance.

R1 contains one connected stator solid and no nominal volumetric interference between the checked assembly components.

Physical comparison

The commercial database contains 144 screening comparisons. Internal dimensions and winding are estimated for that dataset.

0 independent references are currently recorded. The status is NO_INDEPENDENT_REFERENCE.

Bench back-EMF, resistance, mass, torque, losses and temperatures remain to be established.

[ gabizos-6lr R1 ] experimental revision

Nominal geometry

R1 CAD and winding inputs
Stator23 × 10 mm (2310)
Configuration12N14P outrunner
Nominal air gap0.20 mm
Winding input12 turns / tooth, 1 × 0.50 mm
Mass estimate51.3 g, with allowances
Measured performanceNot established

Mass uses nominal material densities, CAD volumes, analytical copper length, a 3.0 g bearing allowance and 0.5 g consumable allowance. It has not been weighed.

R1 calculation snapshot

Model 0.6.0 estimates, not measurements
Scalar-equivalent Kv903 RPM/V
Tooth flux density2.04 T, constraint exceeded
Stator yoke / bell1.43 / 1.31 T
Bare copper slot fill36.33%, before insulation
Constraint statusOutside legacy design constraints

Scalar Kv has no identified phase, line or controller convention. The analytical iron law is not supplier characterization. These estimates do not define a rated operating point.

Independent measurements for the next design.

Interested in a technical comparison or a bench protocol? Get in touch to discuss the reference data and the next iteration.

contact@fra142motors.com