Novel Sub-Harmonic-Based Self-Excited Brushless Wound Rotor Synchronous Machine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article aims to realize a self-excited wound rotor synchronous machine (WRSM) topology established while considering the subharmonic field excitation scheme. Unlike the conventional subharmonic-based brushless WRSMs that require a dual-inverter configuration, the proposed topology uses a single inverter and a dual-armature winding pattern. The employed dual-armature winding configuration involves a four-pole main armature winding (ABC) and a two-pole open winding (X). The ABC winding is supplied with a three-phase current from a single customary current source inverter (CSI), whereas the X winding carries no current due to its open winding pattern and is responsible for generating subharmonic magnetomotive force (MMF) in the air gap along with the fundamental-harmonic MMF. The fundamental-harmonic MMF is utilized to create a four-pole stator field, while the subharmonic MMF is used to induce the harmonic current in the two-pole harmonic winding of the rotor. The generated harmonic current is rectified to energize the rotor field winding and develop a four-pole rotor field. The electromagnetic interaction of the four-pole stator and rotor fields generates torque. As the proposed subharmonic-based self-excited brushless WRSM employs a single inverter for its brushless operation, this makes it cost-effective compared to the conventional dual-inverter subharmonic-based brushless WRSM topologies. The proposed self-excited brushless WRSM topology is validated through the finite-element analysis (FEA). JMAG-Designer tool is employed to carry out FEA for a four-pole, 24-slot (4p24s) machine. The quantitative relative performance evaluation of the proposed self-excited WRSM topology with the recently developed dual-inverter-controlled subharmonic-based brushless WRSM topology is presented to show its better performance in terms of average, maximum, and minimum torques and torque ripple.
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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".