MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Geometrical Parameter Optimization of Double Rotor Axial-Flux Permanent Magnet Synchronous Motor

2024· article· en· W4402473934 on OpenAlexaff
Koceila Cherfouh, Jason Gu, Ali Jamali-Fard, Xu Zhang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric Motor Design and Analysis
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSynchronous motorMagnetPermanent magnet synchronous generatorRotor (electric)Permanent magnet synchronous motorControl theory (sociology)Permanent magnet motorAC motorFlux (metallurgy)Magnetic fluxPhysicsComputer scienceMaterials scienceAutomotive engineeringMechanical engineeringElectric motorElectrical engineeringEngineeringMagnetic field

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Axial-flux (AF) permanent magnet synchronous motors (PMSM) have been gaining the attention of the research community in recent years. These motors offer high efficiency, high power density, and excellent cooling capabilities. In this paper, the design of a 50W-500rpm AFPM motor for a marine propulsion application is presented. We explore the various geometric parameters' effects on performance parameters such as torque, efficiency, and power density. The genetic algorithm (GA) optimizes geometrical parameters through 2D finite element analysis (FEA) and considers the electric angle for optimal control performance. R2linear regression is then used to determine the variance between the independent and dependent geometric parameters. Co-simulation between MATLAB and Ansys Maxwell is conducted to find the optimal design for this motor. Simulation results are presented and discussed.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicElectric Motor Design and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207