MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Direct voltage MTPA control of interior permanent magnet synchronous motor driven electric vehicles

2024· article· en· W4405098677 on OpenAlexaff
Alaref Elhaj, Mohamad Alzayed, Hicham Chaoui

Bibliographic record

VenueControl Engineering Practice · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSensorless Control of Electric Motors
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectric vehiclePermanent magnet synchronous motorMagnetControl (management)VoltageControl theory (sociology)Permanent magnet synchronous generatorSynchronous motorAutomotive engineeringEngineeringElectrical engineeringComputer sciencePhysicsPower (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This manuscript proposes an efficient, straightforward, direct voltage maximum torque per ampere (MTPA) control scheme for an interior permanent magnet synchronous motor (IPMSM) propelling an electric vehicle (EV). The main feature of the traction control scheme is that the MTPA is attained by directly varying the amplitude and angle of the voltage vector, eliminating the need for current control loops and associated regulators. Instead, a single-speed controller is adopted. Furthermore, an analytical formulation based on the motor voltage model is developed to extract the desired voltage’s magnitude and angle to run the motor within the MTPA operating points, disregarding numerical solutions, control law approximation, long-winded iterative calculations, or approximate representation of the IPMSM. Such a methodology significantly reduces control scheme complexity, enhances computational efficiency, and mitigates the delays associated with cascaded-based control systems. Additionally, it facilitates straightforward real-time implementation. The performance of the designed algorithm is experimentally validated using commonly adopted driving cycles, namely the Federal Test Procedure (US06) drive cycle and the New European Driving Cycle (NEDC). The validity test is performed using a 5 HP IPMSM. Based on the driving cycles employed, an intensive comparative evaluation against MTPA field-oriented control (FOC) is established. A quantitative assessment is conducted using the MTPA FOC as a benchmark to investigate energy consumption. This assessment reveals that the designed strategy achieved energy savings of 1.318% and 2.26% under US06 and NEDC, respectively, compared to the MTPA FOC. The proposed method’s speed-tracking accuracy and computational efficiency are also investigated and compared to the FOC and existing direct voltage approaches, demonstrating an average improvement of 14% in speed-tracking accuracy and 6.8% in computational efficiency. • A Simple direct voltage maximum torque per ampere control scheme is introduced. • Traditional cascaded current control loops are eliminated. • An average speed tracking improvement of 14% and energy savings of 2.26% is achieved. • The proposed method requires less time to be executed due to the direct calculation of its control signals.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.197 · 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

Citations8
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueControl Engineering PracticeSame topicSensorless Control of Electric MotorsFrench-language works237,207