MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Modelling a Rotor Bar of an Induction Motor for Improving Electromagnetic Torque and Efficiency Using Permeance–Based Equivalent Circuit Model and FEA

2023· article· en· W4386323833 on OpenAlexaff
Areej Fatima, Omolbanin Taqavi, Ze Li, Glenn Byczynski, Narayan C. Kar

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric Motor Design and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPermeanceInduction motorTorqueRotor (electric)Finite element methodBar (unit)Equivalent circuitDirect torque controlMaterials scienceControl theory (sociology)Mechanical engineeringAutomotive engineeringEngineeringComputer sciencePhysicsElectrical engineeringStructural engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Induction machines (IMs) are attracting the automotive industries’ focus due to remunerative benefits striving researchers to improve electromagnetic performance characteristics. Enhancing the electromagnetic capabilities of an IM is a challenging task, given the obstacles posed by an elevated rotor copper loss which leads to a rise in rotor temperature, and a low torque density. This paper presents a permeance–based equivalent circuit model (PECM) considering the impact of the rotor temperature in rotor resistance to model a proposed rotor cage structure, by formulating the link between the geometry of the rotor cage and the electrical parameters of the machine. The variation in electrical parameters including rotor resistance and reactance for various rotor structures resulted in the changes of the electromagnetic performances, such as torque production, rotor copper loss, and efficiency. Therefore, the significant impact of the proposed rotor cage dimensions is investigated using sensitivity analysis for finite element analysis (FEA)–based optimization under a fixed volume of the IM. To validate the improvement of the optimal rotor cage over a wide range of frequencies and loading levels, a laboratory–prototyped $11\mathrm{~kW}\mathrm{IM}$ is used as a reference rotor structure. The optimal rotor structure offers improved torque and reduced rotor copper loss resulting in a decreased rotor temperature and higher efficiency.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.458
Threshold uncertainty score0.634

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicElectric Motor Design and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207