2015 International Conference on Sustainable Mobility Applications, Renewables and Technology (SMART) 2015
DOI: 10.1109/smart.2015.7399253
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

3D MEC modeling of a hybrid-excited claw pole alternator incorporating the rotor motion

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4
4

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The iron loss is calculated in (19), the copper loss is related to the resistance and current, and can be expressed as:…”
Section: Loss and Efficiencymentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The iron loss is calculated in (19), the copper loss is related to the resistance and current, and can be expressed as:…”
Section: Loss and Efficiencymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A 3D MEC modeling for HE-CPM is proposed. The Newton-Raphson iteration is used to derivate flux linkage and back EMF [19,20]. The saturation effect inside HE-CPM and the claw-to-claw flux leakage are taken into account in an improved MEC method [8].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Also, it seems more likely that for a mesh-based MEC, a relaxation setting during iteration could be unnecessary. D. Elloumi et al proposed a 3D MEC model for hybrid-excited CPG, which was incorporated into the rotor motion [21,22]. Different flux tubes between stators and rotors were revealed.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Actually, many different technical designs of hybrid excited machines, including claw pole and cylindrical machines with permanent magnets, are described in literature (Paplicki et al , 2015; Di et al , 2016; Guo et al , 2009; Jack et al , 1997; Guo et al , 2003; Zhang et al , 2016; Leroy and Foveau, 2013; Melcescu et al , 2012; Burkhardt et al , 2014; Aydin et al , 2002; Dajaku et al , 2016; Ibala and Masmoudi, 2016; Elloumi et al , 2015; Zhu et al , 2015; Rebhi et al , 2011). Several claw pole machines mentioned above have some serious limitations – the excitation flux is not controllable (Guo et al , 2009; Jack et al , 1997; Guo et al , 2003; Zhang et al , 2016), introducing special areas within the machine to limit the magnetic flux leakage is required (Leroy and Foveau, 2013) or construction of the machine is very complicated (Melcescu et al , 2012; Burkhardt et al , 2014).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%