[ARTICLE] Rotor-Through-Coils Toroidal-Flux Reluctance E-Motor for Aviation (Canadian Journal of Applied Physics Research / 2024)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Electrification of aviation propulsion is in progress. New electric motor architectures — beyond axial and radial fluxes — may be required to unlock its full potential in meeting the demanding functional requirements (in terms of power, weight and efficiency) and certification requirements (from airworthiness authorities) set for airborne operating engine. This article presents a new class of toroidal-flux reluctance electric motors, where the rotor travells inside the coils — the Rotor-Through-Coils (RTC) Reluctance E-Motor. Extensive finite element magnetic model analysis was conducted (including motor operational characteristics assessment), following from an existing validated approach. The power delivered by five series-mounted motors rivales fuel-injected engines powering existing acrobat airplanes, including similar dimensions. A further important advantage will follow in a sequel publication showing the substantial advantage of this motor architecture to be entirely and effeciently air-cooled (like high pressure turbines already do in turbofans), removing the added complexity, weight, cost and certification issues implied in using onboard liquid coolants.Canadian Journal of Applied Physics Research link: https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/apr/article/view/0/50794-------------------------------------------------------------------------For more public data, please visit my Figshare profile: https://figshare.com/authors/Luis_Teia/10811244<br>
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.014 | 0.001 |
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".