A Comparative Study of Mechanical Vibration between Conventional and Mutually-Coupled Switched Reluctance Machines
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents a comparison of mechanical vibration behaviour between conventional switched reluctance machines (CSRMs) and mutually-coupled switched reluctance machines (MCSRMs). Six SRMs with different types of winding configurations are compared in terms of phase current, radial force, vibration torque and torque ripple in both time and frequency domains. The results indicate that compared with CSRMs, the radial vibration of MCSRMs can be significantly suppressed with bipolar sinusoidal excitation, due to the gentle change rate of phase current and radial force. Among MCSRMs, the double/single-layer short-pitch ones exhibit the smallest radial force and vibration as well as competitive torque with CSRMs. In addition, the double-layer fractional-pitch MCSRM has the largest average torque, whereas the single-layer short-pitch counterpart has the lowest torque ripple. The predicted results are verified in dynamic simulation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".