Sizing of a Traction Switched Reluctance Motor for an Electric Refuse-Collecting Vehicle Application
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Refuse-collecting vehicles are significant polluters due to their expected drive cycles involving frequent stops and long idle periods. Electric refuse-collecting vehicles, still in their infancy, promise to address this through the replacement of internal combustion engines with batteries and electric traction motors. Today, typical motors for these vehicles involve heavy use of rare earth permanent magnets, which are subject to high price volatility, environmentally damaging mining practices, and occupational health hazards associated with refinement. The switched reluctance motor, which makes use of no permanent magnets, is a suitable substitute. This type of motor technology offers several advantages such as simple and robust construction, the ability to operate at high speeds and high temperature conditions, fault tolerance capability, and lower production costs in comparison with other technologies. This paper focuses on the design process of a switched reluctance motor for a battery electric refuse-collecting vehicle. The designed motor has a 36/24 outer rotor configuration, and its electrical and mechanical characteristics are based on the commercial traction motor TM4 SUMO HD HV3500-9P. The performance of the motor is evaluated using simulation tools such as JMAG and MATLAB/Simulink.
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.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it