MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2157647160 · doi:10.1109/60.937199

Determining total losses and temperature rise in induction motors using equivalent loading methods

2001· article· en· W2157647160 on OpenAlexaff
A. Mihalcea, B. Szabados, J. Hoolboom

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Energy Conversion · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicMagnetic Properties and Applications
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInduction motorConsistency (knowledge bases)InverterControl theory (sociology)Temperature measurementInduction heatingMaterials scienceEngineeringComputer scienceElectromagnetic coilVoltageElectrical engineeringPhysicsThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Conventional loading of induction motors is an extremely difficult and expensive process for large machines. In those cases, full load losses and temperature rise can be estimated by means of equivalent loading methods, which provide an accurate alternative, without the need of a mechanical load applied to the shaft. This paper describes three such methods, all using a commercial PWM inverter. The methods examined are described in detail and the results of tests performed on a 10 hp induction motor are presented. A calorimetric measurement facility was used in order to ensure consistency of result comparison between the different methods, as well as high accuracy for total loss measurement. The measured values of losses and temperature rise, although marginally larger, are in good agreement with those obtained through conventional loading.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 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

Citations27
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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