MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312309153 · doi:10.1109/access.2022.3210982

Modeling and Evaluation of Mutual Coupling Effect in Conventional Switched Reluctance Machines Using Space Vector Representation

2022· article· en· W4312309153 on OpenAlexaff
Peter Azer, Sumedh Dhale, Milan Kordic, Ali Emadi

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Access · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric Motor Design and Analysis
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSwitched reluctance motorControl theory (sociology)Finite element methodLookup tableRotor (electric)Coupling (piping)Flux linkageComputer scienceHarmonicsExcitationTorqueTopology (electrical circuits)PhysicsMathematicsInduction motorDirect torque controlEngineeringVoltageArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a non-linear model for conventional switched reluctance machines (CSRMs) that considers the mutual coupling between phases. Although CSRMs are based on single-phase excitation, there is usually an overlapping between the excited phases. During this overlapping, the CSRM is at 2-phase excitation and the single-phase representation of motor dynamics is not accurate. Hence, a dynamic model is presented in this paper that that accounts for the the mutual coupling between phases in addition to the effects of saturation and spatial harmonics. The proposed method is based on modeling the resultant current vector due to 2-phase excitation in space. The relationship between the resultant current and flux linkage vectors is obtained at different rotor positions using finite element method (FEM). This relationship is saved as a 3D lookup table (LUT). These 3D LUTs are reduced into 2D LUTs independent of rotor position by representing the phase currents as vectors instead of instantaneous values. Similarly, the relationship between the resultant current vector and the electromagnetic torque is obtained and saved as a 3D lookup table. The proposed method is compared with a conventional model where the mutual coupling is not considered. This comparison is conducted using FEM on two different motors; the first motor is 12/8 3-phase 2kW CSRM and the second motor is 24/16 3-phase 75kW CSRM. FEM results show that the mutual coupling is significant for high power motors. The proposed dynamic model is compared with experimental results using the 12/8 3-phase 2kW CSRM.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.087
Threshold uncertainty score0.346

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.284 · 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 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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE AccessSame topicElectric Motor Design and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207