Effect of battery voltage variation on electric vehicle performance driven by induction machine with optimal flux‐weakening strategy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Electric vehicle (EV) traction drives should be associated with flux‐weakening (FW) techniques wide‐range speed demands. In this study, the EV performance with an optimal FW strategy is studied in relation to the battery voltage variation caused by cell state‐of‐charge and temperature changes. The results show that the battery suffers from a voltage reduction by larger internal resistance as the temperature decreases. Moreover, the higher current is required for activating the FW process. However, the inner resistance growth produces more heat inside the cell that affects the battery electrical parameters as well as the system. To assess this effect by simulation, an improved electro‐thermal model of lithium‐ion battery ls dynamically coupled to the optimal FW strategy. In this model, all the electrical parameters are temperature‐dependent deduced from experimental measurements of an off‐road EV. The simulation results confirm the effect of the cell self‐heating on the battery voltage at sub‐zero temperatures. The higher battery voltage can support the FW operation at −10°C for more 1200 s under the modified NEDC driving cycle, whereas the motor drive voltage is saturated after 1118 s by using the simple battery model without thermal effects.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".