MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3183583723 · doi:10.4271/14-11-01-0001

A Fast Permanent Magnet Width Determination Method for Multiple-Layer Flux-Barrier Permanent Magnet-Assisted Reluctance Machines

2021· article· en· W3183583723 on OpenAlexaff
Yawei Wang, Arfakhshand Ali Qazalbash, Michael Kasprzak, Dhafar Al-Ani, Ali Emadi, Nicola Bianchi, Berker Bilgin

Bibliographic record

VenueSAE International Journal of Electrified Vehicles · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric Motor Design and Analysis
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMagnetMagnetic reluctanceElectropermanent magnetFlux (metallurgy)Layer (electronics)Materials scienceCondensed matter physicsPhysicsPermanent magnet synchronous generatorElectrical engineeringEngineeringComposite materialMetallurgy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<div>In order to maximize the reluctance torque component, multiple-layer flux barriers are usually employed in permanent magnet-assisted synchronous reluctance (PMAREL) motors. However, the permanent magnet (PM) dimension of each layer should be carefully designed to achieve the best performance with the minimum PM material. This article investigates this issue and proposes a method to define the PM width according to the sinusoidal no-load airgap flux density distribution. First, the accuracy of the no-load magnetic circuit for airgap flux density calculation is verified with finite element analysis (FEA), considering single or multiple flux-barriers per pole. The effects of the location, width, and thickness of the PM are investigated separately. Then the PM width is derived by the equations developed from the no-load magnetic circuit. The proposed method reduces both the PM mass and the torque ripple. This approach provides a fast and efficient way to determine the width of the magnets in different layers of flux barriers.</div>

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.621
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
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSAE International Journal of Electrified VehiclesSame topicElectric Motor Design and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207