MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4318768074 · doi:10.1109/tmag.2023.3241254

Accurate and Simple Modeling of Eddy Current Braking Torque: Analysis and Experimental Validation

2023· article· en· W4318768074 on OpenAlexaff
Abdullah Muhammad Mahfouz, Mohammed Hussien Mohammed, Shoukry I. Shams, Hossam S. Abbas

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Magnetics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMagnetic Bearings and Levitation Dynamics
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEddy current brakeTorqueEddy currentControl theory (sociology)MechanicsDragRotational speedPhysicsRetarderThreshold brakingComputer scienceClassical mechanicsAutomotive engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A compact, reliable, and straightforward mathematical modeling of the eddy current (EC) braking torque is proposed in this article. First, the braking magnetic force, which curbs the movement of a rotating disk (RD), is evaluated using the basic laws of electromagnetism. Second, the braking torque is related to the braking force through a polynomial function model. The model parameters are evaluated by plugging in measurement samples in the equation of motion taking into account the nonlinear behavior of the aerodynamic drag forces. The proposed model neither has limitations on the braking system geometry nor the disk rotational speed as long as the measurement samples cover the whole speed range. Moreover, it is validated experimentally for constant and alternating magnetic flux profiles with best fit rates (BFRs) more than 85% and 93% for both rotational speed and braking torque, respectively. Furthermore, programmable braking application is demonstrated using the proposed approach and its applicability is verified experimentally.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations11
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on MagneticsSame topicMagnetic Bearings and Levitation DynamicsFrench-language works237,207