A motor redesigned to get cheaper as it scales, not more complex.
Magnetro is built around a patented three-phase induction motor: the same physics as a standard squirrel-cage motor, but a stator and rotor made from straight, identical parts instead of curved, mismatched ones. A working prototype exists. The R&D to measure it properly is what this page is asking for.
The induction motor is cheap because it is mass-produced, not because it is simple to build.
A conventional squirrel-cage motor is one indivisible assembly. Its stator is a stack of ring-shaped laminations with slots cut into the bore, the windings are threaded down those slots, and the rotor cage is cast to fit. Every one of those parts is shaped for exactly one frame size, and not one of them repeats anywhere else in the motor.
- × Nothing in it is a repeated part. Nearly every shape needs its own tooling.
- × The two end shields that close the housing are not the same part either.
- × Every size is its own motor. If you want more power you design a new one rather than build more of what you already make.
Motors got cheaper through bigger batches rather than fewer parts. Simplifying the architecture itself (building a motor out of a handful of identical pieces you can stack) has stayed a niche in industry. That is why there is so little public data on how well it works.
Same motor. Straight parts, not curved ones.
Vachagan Petrosyan and Hrayr Aharonyan's design keeps the induction motor's underlying operation unchanged: a rotating magnetic field still induces current in a spinning disc. What changes is the part count. The stator's three core packages run straight and parallel to the shaft, and they are one part repeated three times. Both base plates come out identical too, where a conventional housing closes with two different end shields. The packages then stack in as many identical sections as an application needs, so more power means more sections instead of a new motor.
Front view of the stator: three identical, straight core packages at 120°. Redrawn from Fig. 2 / Fig. 8 of the patent for clarity, not traced from the filing.
Three variants, one underlying part:
- Sectioned rotor Two identical rotor discs sit either side of one stator (a stator-in, rotor-out layout).
- Sectioned stator Two identical stator sections sit either side of one rotor disc.
- Both sectioned Stator sections and rotor discs alternate along the shaft, as many of each as the application calls for.
- Offset-half stator A third layout: two identical stator halves sharing one pair of base plates, the second half's cores rotated 60° from the first.
Built, wired, and spinning
This is the patent's first variant, filmed on a three-phase test rig: a flat disc rotor, three coil packages at 120° around the shaft, and the two identical base plates the patent describes. It runs. It has not yet been independently measured. See Status, below, for exactly what that does and doesn't mean.
Bench test of the first-variant prototype. Sound on: that's the motor, not a voiceover.
Turning a working bench unit into measured numbers
Nothing below has happened yet. This is the plan the R&D funding is for, in order.
-
Baseline instrumentation
Mount the prototype on a proper test rig and log torque, RPM, and input power, alongside a comparable off-the-shelf induction motor of the same frame size, under the same conditions.
-
Cost teardown
A full bill of materials and a labor-hour estimate for the patented design at volume, set against the same numbers for a conventional motor of the same frame size.
-
Thermal and load mapping
Run it under sustained load and record how it behaves over time, not just how it starts.
-
A scaled, sectioned build
Build one of the patent's multi-section variants, to prove “add a module, not a new design” in metal, not just in the claims.
-
Manufacturing partner and pilot run
Take the measured, costed design to a shop for a small pilot batch.
Where this actually stands
Everything this page claims can be checked: the patent dates against the filing, the prototype against the video above. Nothing on this page states an efficiency, a cost, or a performance figure for the motor itself, because none has been measured yet. That measurement is exactly what the R&D roadmap above is for.
Patent details
Talk to us about licensing, funding, or manufacturing
Whether you're evaluating this for a license, considering funding the R&D roadmap above, or running a shop that could pilot a build, the fastest way in is email.
marc.petrosyan@gmail.com