Proposed OLTEM model demonstrates reduced mean squared error in motor temperature prediction, suggesting enhanced accuracy over traditional models.
Background and Objective: Temperature management is key for reliable operation of permanent magnet synchronous motors (PMSMs). The lumped-parameter thermal network (LPTN) is fast and interpretable but struggles with nonlinear behavior under high power density. We propose OLTEM, a physics-informed deep model that combines LPTN with a thermal neural network (TNN) to improve prediction accuracy while keeping physical meaning. Methods: OLTEM embeds LPTN into a recurrent state-space formulation and learns three parameter sets: thermal conductance, inverse thermal capacitance, and power loss. Two additions are introduced: (i) a state-conditioned squeeze-and-excitation (SC-SE) attention that adapts feature weights using the current temperature state, and (ii) an enhanced power-loss sub-network that uses a deep MLP with SC-SE and non-negativity constraints. The model is trained and evaluated on the public Electric Motor Temperature dataset (Paderborn University/Kaggle). Performance is measured by mean squared error (MSE) and maximum absolute error across permanent-magnet, stator-yoke, stator-tooth, and stator-winding temperatures. Results: OLTEM tracks fast thermal transients and yields lower MSE than both the baseline TNN and a CNN–RNN model for all four components. On a held-out generalization set, MSE remains below 4.0 °C2 and the maximum absolute error is about 4.3–8.2 °C. Ablation shows that removing either SC-SE or the enhanced power-loss module degrades accuracy, confirming their complementary roles. Conclusions: By combining physics with learned attention and loss modeling, OLTEM improves PMSM temperature prediction while preserving interpretability. This approach can support motor thermal design and control; future work will study transfer to other machines and further reduce short-term errors during abrupt operating changes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sheng et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: