MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Design of a Medium Voltage Switched Reluctance Motor for a Condensate Extraction Pump Application

2024· article· en· W4400945733 on OpenAlexafffund
Charitha Abeyrathne, Korawege N. C. Jayasena, Harsh Dipakkumar Patel, Berker Bilgin

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric Motor Design and Analysis
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMathWorks
KeywordsSwitched reluctance motorExtraction (chemistry)Reluctance motorVoltageAutomotive engineeringMaterials scienceComputer scienceElectrical engineeringEngineeringChemistryChromatographyRotor (electric)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Switched Reluctance Motor (SRM) has emerged as a promising candidate for various applications, including electric vehicles (EVs), industrial motors, and pumps. Its appeal lies in its robustness, potentially low production costs with lower manufacturing complexity, absence of permanent magnets, excellent power-speed characteristics, and high reliability. This paper delves into the design and dynamic analysis of an SRM for a high-torque, medium-voltage (MV) pump application in an industrial setting. The SRM is designed to match the output power (0.5 MW) and voltage (6 kV) of an induction motor (IM) while adhering to the same dimensional constraints. Crucial performance indices, such as torque ripple and density, have been analyzed to evaluate the motor’s suitability for an industrial application. The proposed SRM is for a high-capacity Condensate Extraction Pump (CEP) application commonly used in industrial steam generation systems. The proposed SRM design consists of a 12/8 pole configuration. The design and performance constraints are based on an industrial MV IM used for a CEP in a thermal power plant. As part of the proposed design process, static characterization of the SRM is performed utilizing Finite Element Analysis (FEA) in JMAG software. Dynamic performance analysis is conducted using a MATLAB/Simulink model. Key performance indices of the proposed SRM design were analyzed at all operating points, including torque ripple, efficiency, and temperature distribution. Dynamic performance verification and thermal, efficiency analysis are conducted using Motor-CAD software.

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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.978
Threshold uncertainty score0.346

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.229 · 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
GenreMethods

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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicElectric Motor Design and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207