MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2802841716 · doi:10.1109/tpel.2018.2835773

An Improved Torque Sharing Function for Torque Ripple Reduction in Switched Reluctance Machines

2018· article· en· W2802841716 on OpenAlexafffund
Haoding Li, Berker Bilgin, Ali Emadi

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Power Electronics · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric Motor Design and Analysis
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersCanada Excellence Research Chairs, Government of CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsSwitched reluctance motorControl theory (sociology)TorqueTorque rippleFlux linkageRippleDirect torque controlCopper lossReduction (mathematics)Computer scienceEngineeringMathematicsPhysicsControl (management)VoltageArtificial intelligenceInduction motor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An offline torque sharing function (TSF) is introduced in this paper for torque ripple reduction in switched reluctance machines (SRM). This TSF uses static flux linkage characteristics of the machine obtained from finite element analysis or experiments that describe the machine dynamics to determine optimal current profiles such that the torque ripple reduction is achieved with minimal copper losses. Due to this feature, the proposed TSF performs well across a wide speed range. Additionally, the objective function of the proposed TSF uses only one weight parameter, which facilitates the use of this TSF. In this paper, an intuitive justification for the selection of this weight parameter is given, and the performance of this TSF is validated in simulation and experimentally on a 5.2 kW, four phase SRM. To baseline its performance, the proposed TSF has been compared to the offline TSF in the literature, which shows that it has better current tracking performance at higher speeds due to the inclusion of flux linkage characteristics. Finally, it has been compared to conduction angle control at speeds above the base speed to show that it can be a viable alternative for the control of SRM even in an operation region normally not considered for TSF.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.222 · 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

Citations248
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Power ElectronicsSame topicElectric Motor Design and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207