MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Practical Approach for Distribution Transformer Loss of Life Assessment Considering Electric Vehicles Penetration

2023· article· en· W4387006034 on OpenAlexaffabout
Hafiz Muhammad Usman, Ramadan El‐Shatshat, Ayman El‐Hag

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicThermal Analysis in Power Transmission
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDistribution transformerTransformerAutomotive engineeringElectricityElectrical engineeringReliability engineeringElectromagnetic coilEngineeringComputer scienceEnvironmental scienceVoltage

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The rapid and massive acceptance of electric vehicles (EVs) is causing challenges for distribution transformers (DTs) to operate over their expected lifespan. Unlike substation power transformers, whose life consumed/loss of life (LOL) is monitored by directly measuring winding temperature, the winding temperature of DTs cannot be measured in practice due to their massive population, inexpensive cost, and lack of remote communication. Thus, the LOL of residential DTs are required to be estimated by IEEE Standard C57.91-2011. This work proposes a hardware-free two-stage practical approach to assess the real-time LOL of a distribution transformer in residential premises. The first stage determines the kVA load of a DT, without the need of fixed power factor assumption. The DT kVA load along with the ambient temperature and DT thermal parameters are used for DT LOL assessment. Numerical validation is conducted on real-world data utilizing electricity consumption and ambient temperature of fifteen households in London, Ontario, Canada. The study in this work also includes the penetration of the most popular EVs in Canada, along with the service drop cable data as well as practical secondary distribution circuit configuration.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.824
Threshold uncertainty score0.353

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.265 · 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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicThermal Analysis in Power TransmissionFrench-language works237,207