Inclusion of Wire Twisting Effects in Cable Impedance Calculations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cable-series impedance modeling is widely applied in electromagnetic transients simulations and power-loss calculations. The calculations are usually performed in a 2-D frame using the finite-element method or alternative approaches, such as MoM-SO, thereby losing the 3-D effects imposed by twisting wire screens and armors. One of the implications of using 2-D modeling for three-core and closely packed single-core cables is that currents will always circulate among the individual wires of each wire screen or armor. However, in the case of twisted screens/armors where the wires are insulated from each other, such current circulation will in reality not exist. As a result, the calculated impedances become incorrect as well as the induced currents and losses on individual conductors. A procedure is introduced for preventing such false current circulations in a 2-D calculation frame by simple manipulation of the system impedance matrix. The approach is demonstrated for the modeling of single-core and three-core cables, with and without external armor. It is shown that the representation of the wire screen/armor armor with respect to current circulations can substantially influence the calculated result, both for the 50/60 Hz impedance and the cable transient behavior. The use of tubular screen representations is also investigated.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".