MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412444843 · doi:10.1109/oajpe.2025.3589243

Early Detection of Stator Inter-Turn and Single Phasing Faults in Induction Motors Using Negative Sequence Voltage Components

2025· article· en· W4412444843 on OpenAlexafffund
Mohammadhossein Nazemi, Xiaodong Liang

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Open Access Journal of Power and Energy · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMachine Fault Diagnosis Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersUniversity of Saskatchewan
KeywordsStatorTurn (biochemistry)Induction motorVoltageSequence (biology)Control theory (sociology)Computer scienceElectrical engineeringEngineeringPhysicsArtificial intelligenceChemistryNuclear magnetic resonance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a non-invasive threshold-based method for early detection of stator inter-turn faults (SITFs) and single phasing (SP) faults in induction motors by measuring the three-phase voltages at the motor terminal. These voltage signals are processed to extract the sequence components. The Negative Voltage Factor (NVF) is defined as the ratio of the magnitudes of negative sequence voltage |V<sub xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">2</sub>| to positive sequence voltage |V<sub xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">1</sub>|, and is used as a fault indicator. The proposed method uses a dual-threshold strategy: a lower threshold for SITFs detection and a higher threshold for SP faults detection by comparing with the VNF values. Unlike traditional current-based approaches, this voltage-based technique proves to be more sensitive and load-independent. Simulation results using ANSYS Maxwell and experiments in the lab for a 2.2 kW induction motor demonstrate the method’s effectiveness to detect incipient SITFs and SP faults accurately under various motor loadings and fault severities.

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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.465

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 communication0.0000.002
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.319 · 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
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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Open Access Journal of Power and EnergySame topicMachine Fault Diagnosis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207