The numerical modeling of magnetic materials in simulators is a difficult task, above all in real devices with specific excitation. The aim of this work is to compare the accuracy of scalar and vector Preisach models in a well know test benchmark: the TEAM 32 problem. The availability of measured data for this benchmark test and the simple geometry allow us to build hysteresis models and to test them in a 2D finite element analysis (FEA) scheme. The specific numerical formulation of each hysteresis model implemented is described, including the technique for the numerical identification of parameters starting from measured data. The comparison among the models is done in terms of accuracy, but also in terms of easy implementation in the FEA scheme and of computational cost.

Comparison between different models of magnetic hysteresis in the solution of the TEAM 32 problem

Cardelli E.;Faba A.;Quondam Antonio S.;
In corso di stampa

Abstract

The numerical modeling of magnetic materials in simulators is a difficult task, above all in real devices with specific excitation. The aim of this work is to compare the accuracy of scalar and vector Preisach models in a well know test benchmark: the TEAM 32 problem. The availability of measured data for this benchmark test and the simple geometry allow us to build hysteresis models and to test them in a 2D finite element analysis (FEA) scheme. The specific numerical formulation of each hysteresis model implemented is described, including the technique for the numerical identification of parameters starting from measured data. The comparison among the models is done in terms of accuracy, but also in terms of easy implementation in the FEA scheme and of computational cost.
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11391/1553213
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 3
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 3
social impact