## 5 Conclusions  
In this study, a novel consequent-pole rotor structure is proposed that applies the flared CP structure to the IPM model structure. In the flared IPM motor structure, a number of PMs are arranged inside the rotor in a flared structure to comprise a single polarity. This is advantageous for concentrating the magnetic flux and controlling the angle of the magnetic pole. In general, the CPM structure has the advantage of reducing the amount of magnet used. However, due to the asymmetry of back-EMF, various problems can occur. Therefore, a novel flared CP structure is proposed by utilizing the characteristics of the flared-structured rotor and the magnitude reduction and asymmetry limitations of the back-EMF are improved through optimization using GA. In particular, compared with the electro-magnetic analysis result of the basic FCPM model, the electro-magnetic analysis result of the optimal FCPM model has increased the magnitude of the back-EMF by 14.5% and the asymmetric back-EMF waveform of the optimal FCPM model is improved symmetrically. Therefore, the THD of the back-EMF is also reduced by 38.3%. In addition, at a rated load, the torque ripple is also reduced by 73.8% and the efficiency improved by 2.7%. Through this, the FCPM structure is proposed, and the performance is improved through optimization. In particular, it was confirmed that the THD and torque ripple reduction were improved.  
To confirm the validity of the optimization result, a prototype of the optimal FCPM model was constructed and evaluated experimentally. As a result of comparing the analysis results of the optimal model with the experimental results, the efficiency of the optimal FCPM prototype was improved by 2.9% and the torque ripple was significantly reduced by 74.9%. Finally, it was possible to improve the performance of the proposed FCPM model and verify the validity of the optimization results. In the future, we will conduct an actual SET performance test using the prototype produced in this paper.  
Conceptualization, K.-y.Y. and Y.-m.Y; methodology, K.-y.Y. and Y.-m.Y; software, K.-y.Y; validation, K.-y.Y. and Y.-m.Y; writing--original draft preparation, K.-y.Y; writing--review and editing, K.-y.Y. and Y.-m.Y.; and funding acquisition, K.-y.Y. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.  
This study was supported by a 2023 research fund from the Honam University. This research was also supported by the \"Regional Innovation Strategy (RIS)\" through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) funded by the Ministry of Education (MOE) (2021 RIS-002).  
Not applicable.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Item**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Unit**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Basic FCPM**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Optimal FCPM Model**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Relative Difference**} \\ \cline{3-3} \cline{5-6}  & & **Model** & & & **Model** \\ \cline{3-3} \cline{5-6}  & & **Analysis** & **Analysis** & **Experiment** & \\ \hline Back-EMF & Vrms & 28.32 & 32.43 & 33.10 & \(\blacktriangle 16.9\%\) \\ (Phase) & THD & 45.8 & 7.5 & - & \(\blacktriangledown\)38.3\% \\ Average & Nm & 1.30 & 1.29 & 1.30 & - \\ ripple & Nm & 1.91 & 0.50 & 0.48 & \(\blacktriangledown\)74.9\% \\ Copper loss & W & 93.8 & 65.6 & 64.8 & \(\blacktriangledown\)30.9\% \\ Iron loss & W & 35.8 & 33.3 & 31.8 & \(\blacktriangledown\)11.2\% \\ Output power & W & 1019.2 & 1010.3 & 1010 & - \\ Efficiency & \% & 88.7 & 91.1 & 91.3 & \(\blacktriangle 2.9\%\) \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 9: Analysis results at the rated load condition.