MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Optimization of Flux Switching Permanent Magnet Motor to enhance the traction of an Electric Vehicle

2021· article· en· W4200550676 on OpenAlexaff
Kehinde R. Kamil, Jemilat I. Kamil, Qingsong C. Wang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric Motor Design and Analysis
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStatorMagnetTraction motorRotor (electric)PropulsionAutomotive engineeringElectric vehicleElectric motorFinite element methodTraction (geology)Synchronous motorComputer scienceMechanical engineeringTopology (electrical circuits)EngineeringPower (physics)Electrical engineeringPhysicsAerospace engineeringStructural engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is a rising outcry of environmental pollution and the resulting effect of global warming caused by the use of fossil energies, there is a need for the introduction of highly efficient electric machines for propulsion and traction of the moving part with the increasing global acceptance of electric vehicles and advance machineries. This paper proposed a way to optimize the stator flux switching permanent magnet motor (FSPM) by the introduction of two dual slot additional rotors that are staged 180 degrees apart. The structure, electromagnetic properties and the phase direction of rotation of the proposed permanent magnet machine were investigated at different phase angle. Background study on the mode structure of establishing the proposed topology of one stator and two rotors instead of the conventional one rotor for the motor operation was done. With attention paid to the losses on the stator and rotor, finite element method was used to establish the structure of the proposed permanent magnet machine. The load simulation of the electromagnetic properties was investigated using FEMM 4.2 and Ansys Maxwell to show the advantages of the proposed machine topology to allowing higher electric loading to increase power density in electric vehicles.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.347
Threshold uncertainty score0.262

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicElectric Motor Design and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207