MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Optimal Current Control of Switched Reluctance Motors Over the Entire Operating Range

2024· article· en· W4406138155 on OpenAlexaff
Yasaman Niazi, Babak Nahid‐Mobarakeh

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric Motor Design and Analysis
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSwitched reluctance motorReluctance motorCurrent (fluid)Control theory (sociology)Range (aeronautics)Control (management)Machine controlComputer scienceAutomotive engineeringControl engineeringElectrical engineeringEngineeringRotor (electric)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Controlling Switched Reluctance Motors (SRMs) requires careful selection of conduction angles to ensure optimal performance under various operating conditions. At low speeds, hysteresis control can provide the required torque by selecting the appropriate current reference. However, torque quality and efficiency can be further improved by selecting the right conduction angles. In contrast, conduction angles are the only control parameters at high speeds since peak current control is impossible. Hence, choosing the right conduction angles can significantly impact the average torque, torque ripple, and the RMS value of phase current, loss, and efficiency. This paper discusses the effects of turn-on and turn-off angles on average torque, torque ripple, and Integral Time Absolute Error (ITAE). Genetic Algorithm (GA) is used to find optimized firing angles, and the objective function for optimization is maximizing the average torque. The paper proposes a comprehensive approach to automatically control the conduction angles that excite SRMs at variable speeds, reference currents, and DC-link voltages. The results of the simulation demonstrate the efficacy of this method. Furthermore, the proposed controls are evaluated in a three-phase 12/8 SRM compared to a conventional controller. This controller is particularly suitable for transportation applications, especially for traction and propulsion in vehicles, due to its high average torque, low torque ripple, and fast dynamic response across various operating points.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicElectric Motor Design and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207