MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2028388103 · doi:10.1109/ccece.2012.6334902

Determination of parameters of a synchronous motor with radial permanent magnets and rotor damper bar cage

2012· article· en· W2028388103 on OpenAlexaff
Sorin Deleanu, David M. Carpenter, M.W.S. Lau

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric Motor Design and Analysis
Canadian institutionsNorthern Alberta Institute of Technology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReactanceFinite element methodRotor (electric)Bar (unit)TorqueComputer scienceMagnetSquirrel-cage rotorControl theory (sociology)Topology (electrical circuits)PhysicsInduction motorMechanical engineeringStructural engineeringElectrical engineeringArtificial intelligenceEngineeringVoltageThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The paper describes the determination of the parameters of a permanent magnet synchronous motor with radial magnets (RPMSM) as functions of power supply conditions and load. The description presents analysis of some steady state and transient performances together with limitations. Two methods are presented in the determination of the values of synchronous reactance for “d-axis” X <inf xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">sd</inf> , respectively “q-axis” X <inf xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">sq</inf> together with the evaluation of the core loss equivalent resistance R <inf xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">c</inf> . The two methods described are a load test performed at the nominal frequency and Finite Element Analysis (FEA). The load tests results, including the direct determination of the internal load angle δ, represent the input of the calculation process for X <inf xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">sd</inf> and X <inf xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">sq</inf> . The synchronous reactance along each of the axes is then used to calculate the developed torque and compared with the torque values from direct measurements. Comparative results have been extracted using FEA and both methods illustrate a good agreement. In addition, FEA provided important indications in terms of maximum allowable current during operation, indicating the starting performance conditions also. The paper ends with an indication of the direction for future development.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.721
Threshold uncertainty score0.269

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.186
Teacher spread0.181 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations5
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicElectric Motor Design and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207