ALBERT

All Library Books, journals and Electronic Records Telegrafenberg

feed icon rss

Your email was sent successfully. Check your inbox.

An error occurred while sending the email. Please try again.

Proceed reservation?

Export
Filter
  • American Institute of Physics (AIP)  (2)
Collection
Publisher
Years
  • 1
    Electronic Resource
    Electronic Resource
    [S.l.] : American Institute of Physics (AIP)
    Journal of Applied Physics 75 (1994), S. 6048-6048 
    ISSN: 1089-7550
    Source: AIP Digital Archive
    Topics: Physics
    Notes: This abstract describes a three-dimensional (3D) finite element solution of a test model that has been reported in the literature. The model is a basis for calculating the current redistribution effects in the end windings of turbogenerators. The aim of the study is to see whether the analytical results of the test model can be found using a general purpose finite element package, thus indicating that the finite element model is accurate enough to treat real end winding problems. The real end winding problems cannot be solved analytically, as the geometry is far too complicated. The model consists of a polyphase coil set, containing 44 individual coils. This set generates a two pole mmf distribution on a cylindrical surface. The rotating field causes eddy currents to flow in the inner massive and conducting rotor. In the analytical solution a perfect sinusoidal mmf distribution is put forward. The finite element model contains 85824 tetrahedra and 16451 nodes. A complex single scalar potential representation is used in the nonconducting parts. The computation time required was 3 h and 42 min. The flux plots show that the field distribution is acceptable. Furthermore, the induced currents are calculated and compared with the values found from the analytical solution. The distribution of the eddy currents is very close to the distribution of the analytical solution. The most important results are the losses, both local and global. The value of the overall losses is less than 2% away from those of the analytical solution. Also the local distribution of the losses is at any given point less than 7% away from the analytical solution. The deviations of the results are acceptable and are partially due to the fact that the sinusoidal mmf distribution was not modeled perfectly in the finite element method.
    Type of Medium: Electronic Resource
    Location Call Number Expected Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 2
    ISSN: 1089-7550
    Source: AIP Digital Archive
    Topics: Physics
    Notes: The abstract presents two methods of solving induction motor problems using a time-harmonic approach, taking into account the saturation of the iron material. The first method uses the following algorithm. Initially, two static nonlinear problems are solved: one problem using the real part of the stator currents, and the other using the imaginary part. From both solutions, a reluctivity vector is generated. This reluctivity vector is then used in solving a time-harmonic problem to calculate the induced rotor currents. These currents are used to solve two new static problems. From the solution, a more accurate reluctivity vector can be generated. Convergence of this method occurs after 4 or 5 steps. The second method is an iterative method of solving nonlinear time-dependent problems by harmonic representation. It is assumed that H(t) is a sinusoidal function of time. A new sinusoidal Beq is introduced based on energy equivalence with the real nonsinusoidal B. This new Beq is used to calculate the new B-H curve for the iron materials involved and after that an equivalent reluctivity. The nonlinear algorithm represents under-relaxation of the equivalent reluctivity, based on the formula: RELUCTnew=RELUCTold+ALPHA*(RELUCTcrnt−RELUCTold), where ALPHA is a relaxation factor usually chosen between 0 and 1. The algorithm shows a good convergence rate (from 10 to 20 steps) if the initial starting vector for reluctivities and the relaxation factor are chosen appropriately. Rules for this choice are given. Both methods are compared. The difference between the induced currents in both methods is about 1%, with a linear solution it is about 300%. Also stored energy, losses, reluctivities, and other quantities are compared.
    Type of Medium: Electronic Resource
    Location Call Number Expected Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
Close ⊗
This website uses cookies and the analysis tool Matomo. More information can be found here...