MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2021990876 · doi:10.1109/tpel.2012.2216901

Design, Analysis, and Optimization of Ironless Stator Permanent Magnet Machines

2012· article· en· W2021990876 on OpenAlexaff
I. Stamenkovic, Nikola Milivojević, N. Schofield, Mahesh Krishnamurthy, Ali Emadi

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Power Electronics · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric Motor Design and Analysis
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStatorDimensioningRotor (electric)MagnetFinite element methodElectromagnetic coilMechanical engineeringMagnetic fluxGenerator (circuit theory)EngineeringComputer sciencePower (physics)Control engineeringElectrical engineeringStructural engineeringMagnetic fieldPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a methodology for the design, analysis, and graphical optimization of ironless brushless permanent magnet machines primarily for generator applications. Magnetic flux in this class of electromagnetic machine tends to be 3-D due to the lack of conventional iron structures and the absence of a constrained magnetic flux path. The proposed methodology includes comprehensive geometric, magnetic and electrical dimensioning followed by detailed 3-D finite element (FE) modeling of a base machine for which parameters are determined. These parameters are then graphically optimized within sensible volumetric and electromagnetic constraints to arrive at improved design solutions. This paper considers an ironless machine design to validate the 3-D FE model to optimize power conversion for the case of a low-speed, ironless stator generator. The machine configuration investigated in this paper has concentric arrangement of the rotor and the stator, solenoid-shaped coils, and a simple mechanical design considered for ease of manufacture and maintenance. Using performance and material effectiveness as the overriding optimization criteria, this paper suggests optimal designs configurations featuring two different winding arrangements, i.e., radial and circumferentially mounted. Performance and material effectiveness of the studied ironless stator designs are compared to published ironless machine configurations.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.203 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations46
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Power ElectronicsSame topicElectric Motor Design and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207