MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2132452898 · doi:10.1109/tmag.2007.892451

Impact of Nearby Adiabatic and Isothermal Barriers on the Thermal Characteristics of a Vertically Oriented Pot-Core Magnetic Component

2007· article· en· W2132452898 on OpenAlexaff
Farzam Farahmand, J.D. Lavers, F.P. Dawson

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Magnetics · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicMagnetic Properties and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMechanicsAdiabatic processConvectionHeat transferMaterials scienceIsothermal processThermalCoupling (piping)Boundary value problemThermodynamicsHeat transfer coefficientPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The coupled problem of estimating the temperature rise due to the winding and core loss in a vertically oriented magnetic component is considered. The principle contributions in this paper are two-fold: 1) the coupling between the losses and thermal problems for the component is addressed accounting for the effects of nearby barriers and 2) the complication that the convection coefficient is not known accurately is overcome by means of solving a coupled electrothermal-air flow problem in order to characterize heat transfer to the ambient surroundings. It is shown that the coupling between the loss and temperature in the magnetic material has negligible effects on the temperature since the deviation in temperature is not more than 13% at worst if the loss is considered constant for different barrier-to-core distances. The convection coefficients of the core's top and side surfaces are shown not to be significantly influenced by the boundary condition imposed on the barrier. The boundary conditions substantially affect the temperature by introducing an additional path for heat transfer. Additionally, the contribution of radiation is found to be roughly 50% of the total loss regardless of the barrier height and distance and its boundary condition

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.436
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.226 · 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.

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

Citations2
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on MagneticsSame topicMagnetic Properties and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207