MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394617612 · doi:10.4271/2024-01-2210

Differential Flatness-Based Control of Switched Reluctance Motors

2024· article· en· W4394617612 on OpenAlexaff
Yasaman Niazi, Azadeh Gholaminejad, Diego F. Valencia, Sumedh Dhale, Babak Nahid‐Mobarakeh

Bibliographic record

VenueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper series · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric Motor Design and Analysis
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSwitched reluctance motorFlatness (cosmology)Control theory (sociology)Reluctance motorDifferential (mechanical device)Control engineeringComputer scienceTorqueControl (management)EngineeringPhysicsArtificial intelligenceAerospace engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<div class="section abstract"><div class="htmlview paragraph">This paper presents a Differential Flatness-Based Control (FBC) approach for the current control of Switched Reluctance Machines (SRMs), a potential candidate for the automotive industry. The main challenges in SRM control methods stem from motor nonlinearity. In electrical drives, FBC has been applied in doubly-fed induction generators, permanent magnet motors, and magnet-assisted synchronous reluctance motors. Among the few papers that have used FBC for SRM, this research distinguishes itself by addressing current control and considering both current and flux-linkage separately as a flat output, an approach not found in previous literature. The performance of the proposed controls is assessed in a three-phase 12/8 SRM against the conventional hysteresis current controller (HCC) and PI controller. Additionally, it is integrated into a torque-sharing function based on a maximum torque per ampere control strategy. This work uses the Integral Time Absolute Error (ITAE) criterion to compare different control methods. The current ITAE of FBC has been reduced by 50% compared to HCC and 41% compared to the PI controller. This controller is well-suited for transportation applications, mainly traction and propulsion in vehicles, due to its low loss and torque ripple compared to conventional controllers. Moreover, dynamic response to changes in load and dyno speed evidence the enhanced performance of the proposed technique.</div></div>

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 score0.975
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
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.211 · 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper seriesSame topicElectric Motor Design and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207