MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391300926 · doi:10.2514/6.2024-1535

Design of Electric Machines Based on Additively Manufactured Lattice Structures

2024· article· en· W4391300926 on OpenAlexaff
Mohsen Broumand, Zekai Hong

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicLaser and Thermal Forming Techniques
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLattice (music)Computer sciencePhysicsAcoustics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent developments in additive manufacturing (AM) bring about unprecedented potentials in designing and developing electromagnetic components; this paper presents a novel concept for designing magnetic cores of electric machines based on triply periodic minimal surface (TPMS) lattices for the development of high specific power and high efficiency electric machines. Fabrication of TPMS lattices is enabled by and uniquely well-suited for additive manufacturing. Compared to additively manufactured bulk cores, lattice cores can improve the performance of electric machines by (a) mitigating eddy current losses and thus total power losses through the presence of large volume of distributed internal voids, and (b) allowing electric machines to be operated at higher speeds and/or torques by relaxing thermal limits through enhanced internal cooling. In the present study, 3D finite element analysis is used to quantify and compare the electromagnetic characteristics of three representative TPMS types with those of a bulk structure. A functionally graded TPMS lattice design, comprising of alternating thin layers of soft magnetic materials and electrical insulating materials, is subsequently proposed to minimize eddy current losses to a level comparable to that of conventional laminated cores over a wide range of operating frequencies. Finally, a conceptual design of the magnetic core of a synchronous reluctance motor (SynRM), i.e., rotor and stator, is presented to illustrate the idea.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.940
Threshold uncertainty score0.500

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicLaser and Thermal Forming TechniquesFrench-language works237,207