MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3021263050 · doi:10.1109/tte.2020.2992008

System-Level Optimization of Hybrid Excitation Synchronous Machines for a Three-Wheel Electric Vehicle

2020· article· en· W3021263050 on OpenAlexafffund
Ahmad Shah Mohammadi, João Pedro F. Trovão

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Transportation Electrification · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric Motor Design and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersCanada Research ChairsFundação para a Ciência e a TecnologiaCompute Canada
KeywordsExcitationSortingDriving cycleGenetic algorithmComputationElectric vehicleFinite element methodComputer scienceNonlinear systemOptimal designSynchronous motorMagnetComponent (thermodynamics)Control theory (sociology)Mathematical optimizationAlgorithmMathematicsEngineeringPhysicsElectrical engineeringStructural engineeringPower (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article, a two-level methodology is proposed to optimize the design of a hybrid excitation synchronous machine (HESM) for a given electric vehicle (EV) over an arbitrary-selected driving cycle. We are looking at a huge analysis problem of finding an optimal hybridization ratio (HR) between the two excitation sources, namely, permanent magnet (PM) and wound excitation (WE). To find the optimal HR, the HR is scanned from 0 to 1 or from pure WE to pure PM excitation. For each HR, the motor is optimally designed at the component level, its cost is minimized, and its global efficiency over the selected driving cycle is calculated. Then, at the system level, the global efficiencies associated with each HR are compared in order to find the optimal HR. The complexity of the design optimization at the component level is addressed by nondominated sorting genetic algorithm II (NSGA-II). To make a compromise between the accuracy and speed of calculations, a nonlinear 3-D dynamic magnetic equivalent circuit (MEC) model is developed and evaluated by commercial finite element analysis (FEA) software. Following the proposed methodology and due to 300 h of computations with 48 CPU cores in parallel, the final HESM design can achieve up to 18.65% higher global efficiency than pure WE and 15.8% higher than pure PM excitation.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.936
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.191 · 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.

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

Citations19
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Transportation ElectrificationSame topicElectric Motor Design and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207