MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2407223435 · doi:10.1109/apec.2016.7468043

Thermal and electrical co-design of a modular high-density single-phase inverter using wide-bandgap devices

2016· article· en· W2407223435 on OpenAlexafffund
Steven Chingyei Chung, Miad Nasr, David Guirguis, Masafumi Otsuka, Shahab Poshtkouhi, David K. W. Li, Vishal Palaniappan, David A. Romero, Cristina H. Amon, Ray Orr, Olivier Trescases

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSilicon Carbide Semiconductor Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersOntario Centres of Excellence
KeywordsInverterMaterials scienceTotal harmonic distortionInductorPower densityPower semiconductor deviceDecoupling (probability)Electrical engineeringElectronic engineeringPower (physics)VoltageEngineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper explores the multi-disciplinary design challenges in building a 240 VAC, 2 kVA modular single-phase inverter with high power-density using wide-bandgap transistors. The compromise between the electrical and mechanical design is extremely important in any high-density power converter. In this work the electrical and mechanical systems were iteratively co-designed using detailed 3D thermal and air-flow simulations. Custom copper heat-sinks and heat-pipes were developed for optimal thermal management. The inverter uses three soft-switching sub-inverters in parallel, which are controlled using a novel digital Hysteretic Current Mode Control (HCMC) scheme. To achieve a flat high efficiency curve with low THD over a wide load range, two operating modes are used: 1) Boundary Conduction Mode (BCM) with a slight negative inductor valley current for soft-switching, and 2) Continuous Conduction Mode (CCM) to limit the required saturation current in the inductors. The design of an active power decoupling scheme to minimize input capacitance is also discussed. The designed single-phase inverter has a volume of 33.1 in3 and resulting theoretical power-density of 60.3 W/in3 at 2 kW load. A measured efficiency of 97.7% is achieved for a single sub-inverter with 4.5% THD at 632.7 W.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations12
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSilicon Carbide Semiconductor TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207