Framework for the optimization of online computable models

Delinchant, Benoît; Würtz, Fréderic; Vasconcelos, J.A.; Coulomb, Jean‐Louis

doi:10.1108/compel-10-2012-0211

Cited by 7 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For the component surfaces, the eddy current loss is defined by: Nevertheless, the modeling in FEA depends on the core symmetry and winding configuration. This dependency produces that the loss calculation in non-symmetric components through a 3D FEM is a difficult task due to the current hardware computational limitations [30].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Review of Core Power Loss Analysis Using Finite Element Methods

González-Teodoro¹,

Enrique²,

Asensi³

2019

Int J Magnetics Electromagnetism

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There are two principal methods are utilized to estimate the core power loss (CPL) in magnetic components: Empirical equations and hysteresis models. Both approaches need an anterior test or analysis to calculate the CPL. Most of them are based on improved Steinmetz equations. Tests are usually costly or the number of necessary tests is excessive for the component design development. 2D analyses using Finite Element are not good enough for several magnetic components for their lack of symmetries.Non-symmetric magnetic cores are ones of the most common components in transformers and power converters and they don't have symmetries on the magnetic field distribution and only 3D models are competent to take account all the effects and phenomena.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Review of Core Power Loss Analysis Using Finite Element Methods

González-Teodoro¹,

Enrique²,

Asensi³

2019

Int J Magnetics Electromagnetism

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Most of the methods to calculate the CPL is necessary to obtain the magnetic field density in a previous analysis or test. If FEM is used to calculate the magnetic field density, the asymmetric components that need a 3D model, however due to the current computational limitations [21], [22] is a difficult task to achieve enough accuracy or it is not productive due the CPU time. The proposed methodology gives an original equation to determine the CPL for Toroidal components used in switchedmode power supplies (normally in non-saturation status) for any signal-based 3D finite element analyses (FEA) [23].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Per-Unit Hysteresis and Eddy Loss Method Based on 3D Finite Elements for Non-Symmetric Toroidal Magnetic

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Several main methodologies are used to estimate the core power loss (CPL) in magnetic components. One group is based in the Steinmetz equation (The modified one, the generalized one and the natural equations are the principals). Another one is the separation of losses between hysteresis, eddy current and excess losses. The third group is based mathematical-empirical hysteresis models and the last one is based on the magnetization process. These approaches need a prior test or analysis to calculate the CPL. Tests are usually expensive, or the number of needed tests is excessive for the component design process. 2D analyses are not enough for some magnetic components due to their lack of symmetries. Toroidal core components are ones of the most common components in transformers and power converters. They do not have symmetries in the magnetic field distribution and only 3D models are satisfactory to take into account all the effects and phenomena. An extensive study of 3D model finite element analysis was developed to determine the main losses in magnetic components core, the hysteresis and eddy current losses. A new methodology is presented, per-unit CPL (considering only Hysteresis and Eddy Current Losses) that permits analyzing the impact of the involved factors separately. The proposed per-unit CPL allows the definition of a new equation for determining hysteresis and eddy current losses using only the geometrical and material parameters (core and coils) used to estimate the total CPL. INDEX TERMS Eddy current, Hysteresis loss, core power loss, 3D modeling, finite element analysis.

show abstract

“…First of all, it requires the ability to express the calculation of these objectives in a single model. This can be achieved by combining models together (physical, economical, environmental), which require to adapt models or to use interoperability solutions [10]. Computer Aided Design tools may provide the right information in order to help the designer in an efficient manner.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…First of all, optimization requires the ability to express the calculation of each objective (physical, economic and environmental) in a single model. This can be achieved by combining models together, which requires adapting models or using interoperability solutions (Delinchant et al, 2014). The following part gives details about electromagnetic and economic models.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparing life cycle cost and environmental impact optimizations of a low voltage dry type distribution transformer

Delinchant

Mandil

Würtz

2018

COMPEL

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeLife cycle analysis (LCA) is more and more used in the context of electromagnetic product design. But it is often used to check a design solution regarding environmental impacts after technical and economical choices. This paper aims to investigate life cycle impact optimization (LCIO) and compare it with the classical life cycle cost optimization (LCCO). Design/methodology/approachFirst, a model of a dry-type transformer using different materials for windings and the magnetic core is presented. LCCO, which is a mixed continuous-discrete, multi-objective technico-economic optimization, is done using both deterministic and genetic algorithms. LCCO results and optimization performances are analyzed, and an LCA is presented for a set of optimal solutions. The final part is dedicated to LCIO, where the paper shows that these optimal solutions are close to those obtained with LCCO. FindingsThis paper investigated LCIO using an environmental impacts model that has been introduced in the optimization framework Component Architecture for the Design of Engineering Systems. The paper shows how a mixed continuous-discrete, multi-objective technico-economic optimization can be done using an efficient deterministic optimization algorithm such as Sequential Quadratic Programming. Thanks to the technico-economic-environmental model and the efficient optimization algorithm, both LCCO and LCIO were performed separately and together. It has been shown that optimal solutions are similar, leading to the conclusion that only one modeling is required (economic or environmental) but on the life cycle. Originality/valueThe classical sequential methodology of design is improved here by the use of a model of calculation of the environmental impacts allowing the optimization. This original optimization allowed the authors to show that an analysis of the life cycle from an economic point of view or from an environmental point of view led to quasi-equivalent technical solutions. The key is to take into account the life cycle of the product.

show abstract

Framework for the optimization of online computable models

Cited by 7 publications

References 16 publications

Review of Core Power Loss Analysis Using Finite Element Methods

Review of Core Power Loss Analysis Using Finite Element Methods

Per-Unit Hysteresis and Eddy Loss Method Based on 3D Finite Elements for Non-Symmetric Toroidal Magnetic

Comparing life cycle cost and environmental impact optimizations of a low voltage dry type distribution transformer

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About