On the Performance of the Frequency-Selective Grounding in Induction Motor Variable Frequency Drives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Variable frequency drives (VFDs) are recommended to be grounded in order to support operation continuity, reduce common-mode voltages (CMVs), enhance safety, limit ground fault currents, and minimize transient over-voltages during ground faults. Various standards and industrial codes are developed to address the design and configuration of adequate grounding systems for VFDs. This paper aims to test the performance of a VFD, when featured with the frequency-selective grounding (FSG). The FSG is designed to appear as a very low ground impedance for high frequency ground voltages, and to appear as a low-resistance for low frequency ground voltages. These features of the FSG can offer significant reductions of common-mode voltages (CMVs) in VFDs, thus minimizing their adverse effects on the motor, power electronic converters, and dc-link capacitors. The ability of FSG to minimize CMVs in VFDs is experimentally tested using a 10hp, 3ϕ induction motor VFD for different operating conditions. Experimental test results detailed in this paper demonstrate the significant reductions in CMVs, along with negligible sensitivity to the control of the VFD
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".