MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2588111890 · doi:10.1109/icece.2016.7853845

Recent advances in direct torque and flux control of IPMSM drives

2016· article· en· W2588111890 on OpenAlexaff
M. Nasir Uddin, Md. Mizanur Rahman

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric Motor Design and Analysis
Canadian institutionsLakehead University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDirect torque controlControl theory (sociology)TorqueVector controlFlux linkageStatorController (irrigation)Nonlinear systemComputer scienceEngineeringControl engineeringControl (management)PhysicsInduction motorElectrical engineeringArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents the latest advancements in direct torque and flux control (DTFC) schemes of interior permanent magnet synchronous motor (IPMSM) drives. A novel eighteen-sector based DTFC scheme incorporating a model based loss minimization algorithm is proposed to mitigate the torque ripples and achieve high efficiency as compared to the conventional six-sector based DTFC scheme. Finally, in order to have direct and better control of reducing the torque/flux ripples further, a nonlinear control incorporating motor electromagnetic developed torque and stator air-gap flux linkage as virtual control variables is developed. In conventional nonlinear controller d-q axis currents (id, iq) are considered as virtual control variables that indirectly controls the torque/flux which may not be suitable for high performance drives. Thus, the proposed work overcomes the major drawback (i.e., torque ripple) of the conventional DTFC based IPMSM drive. Feasibility of the developed DTFC schemes is verified through both simulation and experimental results.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.189 · 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

Citations5
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicElectric Motor Design and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207