Table of Contents
Fetching ...

Self-Error Correcting Method for Magnetic-Array-Type Current Sensors in Multi-Core Cable Applications

Xiaohu Liu, Keyu Hou, Kang Ma, Jian Liu, Angang Zheng, Zhengwei Qu, Wei Zhao, Lisha Peng, Songling Huang, Shisong Li

TL;DR

The paper tackles online error-state evaluation and long-term stability for magnetic-array-type current sensors in multi-core cables, where time-varying phase-current correlations degrade traditional multi-latent-variable models. It introduces a robust self-error correcting framework that decouples phase currents and applies PCA to achieve a single-latent-variable representation per phase, enabling reliable drift detection via the $Q$ statistic and identification of drifted sensors. Drift magnitudes are quantified through a bi-objective NSGA-II optimization to minimize amplitude and phase correlation metrics, followed by compensating the identified sensors and reconstructing phase currents. Experimental validation with an eight-sensor array on a three-core cable demonstrates drift detection down to relative errors of $2 imes10^{-3}$ and phase errors of $2 imes10^{-3}$ rad, confirming substantial reduction of overall array error and proving feasibility for real-time, non-contact current sensing in complex conductor systems. The findings also highlight practical requirements, including a minimum sensor count and uniform distribution, to achieve robust self-error correction in operational environments.

Abstract

Data-driven methods enable online assessment of error states in magnetic-array-type current sensors, and long-term measurement stability can be enhanced through further self-error correction. However, when the magnetic-array-type current sensors are applied to multi-conductor systems such as multi-core cables, the time-varying correlations among conductor currents may degrade the performance of multi-latent-variable data-driven models for error evaluation. To address this issue, this paper proposes a robust self-error correcting method for magnetic-array-type current sensors even under significant variations in phase current correlations (e.g., large fluctuations in three-phase current imbalance). By incorporating phase current decoupling and principal component analysis (PCA), the correlation analysis of multi-latent variables (i.e., multi-conductor currents) is transformed into a single-latent-variable (corresponding to single phase current) modeling problem. Experimental results demonstrate that the proposed method effectively detects error drifts of magnetic field sensors as low as $2\times10^{-3}$ in relative error and $2\times10^{-3}$ rad in phase error. Accurate evaluation and correction of each magnetic field sensor's error drifts substantially eliminates the overall error drift in the magnetic-array-type current sensor, validating the feasibility and effectiveness of the proposed self-error correcting method.

Self-Error Correcting Method for Magnetic-Array-Type Current Sensors in Multi-Core Cable Applications

TL;DR

The paper tackles online error-state evaluation and long-term stability for magnetic-array-type current sensors in multi-core cables, where time-varying phase-current correlations degrade traditional multi-latent-variable models. It introduces a robust self-error correcting framework that decouples phase currents and applies PCA to achieve a single-latent-variable representation per phase, enabling reliable drift detection via the statistic and identification of drifted sensors. Drift magnitudes are quantified through a bi-objective NSGA-II optimization to minimize amplitude and phase correlation metrics, followed by compensating the identified sensors and reconstructing phase currents. Experimental validation with an eight-sensor array on a three-core cable demonstrates drift detection down to relative errors of and phase errors of rad, confirming substantial reduction of overall array error and proving feasibility for real-time, non-contact current sensing in complex conductor systems. The findings also highlight practical requirements, including a minimum sensor count and uniform distribution, to achieve robust self-error correction in operational environments.

Abstract

Data-driven methods enable online assessment of error states in magnetic-array-type current sensors, and long-term measurement stability can be enhanced through further self-error correction. However, when the magnetic-array-type current sensors are applied to multi-conductor systems such as multi-core cables, the time-varying correlations among conductor currents may degrade the performance of multi-latent-variable data-driven models for error evaluation. To address this issue, this paper proposes a robust self-error correcting method for magnetic-array-type current sensors even under significant variations in phase current correlations (e.g., large fluctuations in three-phase current imbalance). By incorporating phase current decoupling and principal component analysis (PCA), the correlation analysis of multi-latent variables (i.e., multi-conductor currents) is transformed into a single-latent-variable (corresponding to single phase current) modeling problem. Experimental results demonstrate that the proposed method effectively detects error drifts of magnetic field sensors as low as in relative error and rad in phase error. Accurate evaluation and correction of each magnetic field sensor's error drifts substantially eliminates the overall error drift in the magnetic-array-type current sensor, validating the feasibility and effectiveness of the proposed self-error correcting method.

Paper Structure

This paper contains 15 sections, 10 equations, 14 figures.

Figures (14)

  • Figure 1: Non-contact current measurement for multi-core cables using a magnetic sensor array, with rectangles representing magnetic field sensors and arrows indicating their sensitivity orientations.
  • Figure 2: Principle of the proposed self-error correcting method for magnetic-array-type current sensors applied to multi-core cables.
  • Figure 3: Illustration of phase currents derivation from measurements of different sub-combinations of magnetic field sensors.
  • Figure 4: Flow chart for identification of the error-drifted magnetic field sensors.
  • Figure 5: Schematic of the self-error correction experiment and corresponding physical test platform (b).
  • ...and 9 more figures