Experimental and numerical comparison between the output voltages of two novel switched reluctance generators
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to propose a combination of two novel switched reluctance generators (SRG) as a suitable prototype to produce electrical energy using natural, renewable and variable speed energy resource. The paper focuses on the voltage generation analysis of two special SRGs. Design/methodology/approach To evaluate the proposed configurations, their structures are introduced firstly, and the output voltages of both two generators are analyzed numerically via three dimensional finite element method. After that the obtained results are validated on laboratory set up. Moreover, the main parameters of each one causing the output voltages are studied. The proposed generators have been manufactured within a common physical framework. This framework consists of two magnetically independent stator and rotor sets (layers), where each stator set includes four salient poles, while the rotor comprises of two salient poles with almost equal arc lengths and no windings. The first generator called Field assisted SRG which has a stationary reel, and so the field coil wrapped around it, and it is placed between the two‐stator sets, whereas in the second type named Self excited SRG, there is no field coil. Findings Via experimental and numerical analysis, it is substantiated that this interesting combination can help users to produce electrical energy from low speeds to high speeds of performance through employing each of these generators in special case of study and application separately. Originality/value This beneficial characteristic of two proposed SRGs can be noticed as a suitable trait in different industries such as aerospace, automobile and production of electrical energy via windmills.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".