MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2804789573 · doi:10.1109/tec.2018.2837893

Magnetization and Demagnetization Energy Estimation and Torque Characterization of a Variable-Flux Machine

2018· article· en· W2804789573 on OpenAlexafffund
Amirmasoud Takbash, Pragasen Pillay

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Energy Conversion · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric Motor Design and Analysis
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaConcordia University
KeywordsMagnetizationAlnicoDemagnetizing fieldTorqueMagnetDirect torque controlTorque rippleTorque densityMaterials scienceControl theory (sociology)PhysicsMechanicsEngineeringComputer scienceMechanical engineeringElectrical engineeringMagnetic fieldVoltageThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper examines the required energy for the magnetization and demagnetization of magnets in a spoke type AlNiCo-based variable-flux machine and studies the torque characteristics of this machine at different magnetization levels. The low coercivity magnet in this machine can be magnetized or demagnetized using a short-time current pulse with negligible Ohmic loss. An advanced method is proposed to estimate the required energy for magnet demagnetization or magnetization to a specific level. A test procedure is developed to measure the energy that is injected to the variable-flux machine during the demagnetization and magnetization procedures. Since this machine has the ability to operate at various magnetization levels, it is of great importance to obtain the torque characteristics such as torque mean value, the peak to peak value of the torque, as well as the torque ripple, at different operating conditions. A static torque measurement test procedure using a variable speed drive system is developed to measure the torque waveform of the variable-flux machine at different magnetization levels. The verified finite element model of the variable-flux machine is used to analyze the harmonic content of the back-emf and the no-load air gap flux density at different levels of magnetization.

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)0.001
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.166
Teacher spread0.162 · 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

Citations32
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Energy ConversionSame topicElectric Motor Design and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207