Novel Method of Estimating Iron Loss Equivalent Resistance of Laminated Core Winding at Various Frequencies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Electromagnetic and magnetic devices are increasingly prevalent in sectors such as transportation, industry, and renewable energy due to the ongoing electrification trend. These devices exhibit nonlinear behavior, particularly under signals rich in harmonics. They require precise and appropriate modeling for accurate sizing. Identifying model-specific parameters, which depend on frequency, is crucial. This article focuses on a specific frequency range where a circuit model with series resistance and inductance, along with a parallel resistance to account for iron losses (Riron), is applicable. While the determination of series elements is well documented, the determination of Riron remains complex and debated, with traditional methods neglecting operating conditions such as magnetic saturation. To address these limitations, an innovative experimental method is proposed, comprising two main steps: determining the complex impedance of the magnetic device and extracting Riron from the model. This method aims to provide a more precise and representative estimation of Riron, improving the reliability and accuracy of electromagnetic and magnetic device simulations and designs. The obtained values of the iron loss equivalent resistance are different by at least 300% than those obtained by an impedance analyzer. The proposed method is expected to advance the understanding and modeling of losses in electromagnetic and magnetic devices, offering more robust tools for engineers and researchers in optimizing device performance and efficiency.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".