MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Thermo-Mechanical Rotor Fatigue of an Interior Permanent Magnet Synchronous Motor

2024· preprint· en· W4390953698 on OpenAlexafffund
Ashish Kumar Sahu, Reemon Z. Haddad, Dhafar Al-Ani, Berker Bilgin

Bibliographic record

VenuePreprints.org · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric Motor Design and Analysis
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsRotor (electric)TorqueAutomotive engineeringPower (physics)Control theory (sociology)Reliability (semiconductor)Materials scienceComputer scienceMechanical engineeringStructural engineeringEngineeringPhysicsControl (management)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Interior permanent magnet motors (IPMSMs) are extensively used as traction motors today because of their exceptional torque and power density, and wide constant power operating range. Under real-world usage, an IPMSM rotor undergoes varying electromagnetic, thermal, and mechanical loads. Under such conditions, fatigue life-based design criteria should be utilized over stress-based design criteria to ensure the structural integrity of the rotor. Moreover, the driving dynamics can change the rotor temperature continuously, which affects the electromagnetic, mechanical, and fatigue properties of rotor material. This paper proposes a robust thermo-mechanical rotor fatigue simulation workflow considering the significant loads acting on an IPMSM rotor and the temperature variation throughout a drive cycle. It discusses an accelerated fatigue life estimation approach based on peak valley extraction to reduce the simulation time significantly for stress and fatigue analysis. Then, it presents a method for stress-life curve generation for a variable loading. It also presents a sensitivity study with a median S-N curve, and a 90%-reliability 95%-confidence (R90C95) S-N curve.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.582
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.245 · 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.

Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePreprints.orgSame topicElectric Motor Design and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207