Comparison
This page summarizes how MIM copper coils compare to conventional wound coils and hairpins for traction motor applications. The scores are based on theoretical potential and typical design practice – not on a specific motor design.
The dot scale is qualitative: more filled dots indicate higher potential or suitability in that category under the given assumptions (high-purity copper, good process control, automotive use case).
| Criterion | Wound | Hairpin | MIM coil |
|---|---|---|---|
| Slot fill factor | ●●●●● | ●●●●● | ●●●●● |
| AC loss optimization | ●●●●● | ●●●●● | ●●●●● |
| Thermal homogeneity | ●●●●● | ●●●●● | ●●●●● |
| HV suitability (800–1200 V) | ●●●●● | ●●●●● | ●●●●● |
| Cross-section design freedom | ●●●●● | ●●●●● | ●●●●● |
The comparison is based on a typical traction motor context (e.g. automotive) and assumes optimized designs for each technology. The focus is on physical potential, not on today’s average implementation.
The benefits of MIM coils are most relevant where power density, efficiency and thermal limits are highly constrained.