MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2991301489 · doi:10.1109/ecce.2019.8912613

Hardware-in-the-loop Simulations of Inverter Faults in an Electric Drive System

2019· article· en· W2991301489 on OpenAlexaff
K. S. Amitkumar, Pragasen Pillay, Jean Bélanger

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicReal-time simulation and control systems
Canadian institutionsOpal-Rt Technologies (Canada)Concordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInverterFault (geology)EngineeringVoltagePower inverterPower (physics)Hardware-in-the-loop simulationControl theory (sociology)Control engineeringComputer scienceElectrical engineeringControl (management)Physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Power Hardware-in-the-loop (PHIL) and Controller-HIL (CHIL) simulations have several benefits with respect to electric drive system testing. Since there is a reduced chance of equipment damage with CHIL and PHIL simulations, they are particularly suited to study the impact of inverter faults. This paper presents PHIL simulations to emulate machine behavior in the event of such inverter faults. The faults considered here are the gate unit failure (or the device open circuit fault) of one or more switches in the driving inverter. The process of voltage sensing, especially during faults, is first explained in this paper. It is shown that the driving inverter terminal voltage is defined, even during faults, thus allowing the possibility to control the PHIL system during these conditions. Experimental results are presented for the same fault conditions from the PHIL system and a prototype permanent magnet synchronous machine (PMSM) coupled to a dc dynamometer. A close match between the two results is shown, proving the ability to operate the PHIL system in current control mode even during such faults. A close match between the two results also proves the sufficiency and utility of PHIL simulations to study driving inverter faults.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.046
Threshold uncertainty score0.298

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.217
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations4
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicReal-time simulation and control systemsFrench-language works237,207