Comparison of Anisotropic Energy-Based and Jiles–Atherton Models of Ferromagnetic Hysteresis

dc.contributorAalto-yliopistofi
dc.contributorAalto Universityen
dc.contributor.authorUpadhaya, Brijeshen_US
dc.contributor.authorRasilo, Paavoen_US
dc.contributor.authorPerkkiö, Laurien_US
dc.contributor.authorHandgruber, Paulen_US
dc.contributor.authorBelahcen, Anouaren_US
dc.contributor.authorArkkio, Anteroen_US
dc.contributor.departmentDepartment of Electrical Engineering and Automationen
dc.contributor.departmentDepartment of Mathematics and Systems Analysisen
dc.contributor.groupauthorComputational Electromechanicsen
dc.contributor.organizationGraz University of Technologyen_US
dc.contributor.organizationTampere Universityen_US
dc.date.accessioned2020-02-03T09:01:34Z
dc.date.available2020-02-03T09:01:34Z
dc.date.issued2020en_US
dc.description.abstractIn this article, we apply an anisotropic extension for the energy-based and the Jiles–Atherton (JA) hysteresis models to simulate both unidirectional alternating and rotational magnetic field excitations. The results show a good agreement with measurements for unidirectional alternating fields. However, the results for rotational fields, especially at high magnitudes, show a significant discrepancy with the measurement data. We demonstrate that the JA model with appropriate parameters can estimate the losses in alternating cases up to 1.5 T, whereas both models give reasonable loss estimation up to 1 T in rotational cases.en
dc.description.versionPeer revieweden
dc.format.extent7
dc.format.extent1-7
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdfen_US
dc.identifier.citationUpadhaya, B, Rasilo, P, Perkkiö, L, Handgruber, P, Belahcen, A & Arkkio, A 2020, ' Comparison of Anisotropic Energy-Based and Jiles–Atherton Models of Ferromagnetic Hysteresis ', IEEE Transactions on Magnetics, vol. 56, no. 4, 8956032 . https://doi.org/10.1109/TMAG.2020.2964745en
dc.identifier.doi10.1109/TMAG.2020.2964745en_US
dc.identifier.issn0018-9464
dc.identifier.issn1941-0069
dc.identifier.otherPURE UUID: 90b98d66-1139-414a-af22-b5620c613738en_US
dc.identifier.otherPURE ITEMURL: https://research.aalto.fi/en/publications/90b98d66-1139-414a-af22-b5620c613738en_US
dc.identifier.otherPURE LINK: http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85082396741&partnerID=8YFLogxKen_US
dc.identifier.otherPURE FILEURL: https://research.aalto.fi/files/40550997/ELEC_Upadhaya_etal_Comparison_of_Anisotropic_IEEETraMag_2020_authoracceptedmanuscript.pdfen_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://aaltodoc.aalto.fi/handle/123456789/42929
dc.identifier.urnURN:NBN:fi:aalto-202002032009
dc.language.isoenen
dc.publisherIEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
dc.relation.ispartofseriesIEEE Transactions on Magneticsen
dc.rightsopenAccessen
dc.subject.keywordEnergy-based (EB) modelen_US
dc.subject.keywordEnergy-based Jiles–Atherton (JA) modelen_US
dc.subject.keywordMagnetic hysteresisen_US
dc.subject.keywordNon-oriented (NO) electrical steelen_US
dc.titleComparison of Anisotropic Energy-Based and Jiles–Atherton Models of Ferromagnetic Hysteresisen
dc.typeA1 Alkuperäisartikkeli tieteellisessä aikakauslehdessäfi
dc.type.versionacceptedVersion
Files