Relay coil has inductive reactance proportional to sqrt(f)

Yeah -- it's a geometric series. If the slope were 1/1, the series would terminate with just one pole, because that's what a capacitor or inductor is. The slope is 1/2, so the R and (L or C) values increase (or decrease) with a constant factor per stage. The number of stages used is determined by the approximation error and bandwidth. (If the slope were 0, it can be approximated by two things: an ideal resistance, or an infinite series of equal L and C -- a lumped equivalent transmission line. Math is fun like that.)

AoE3 shows this in the circuit for pink noise generation, including a bandwidth and error plot.

I've also done same as the OP on a previous occasion:

formatting link
taking that extra step and solving the network as well:
formatting link
You can see L1 and L5-L7 (and associated resistors) model the diffusion loss component. (The core material is a nanocrystalline stripwound material, so it exhibits the same diffusional (skin effect) eddy current losses.)

The capacitances can also be roughly expected, as the laminations have considerable capacitance between them, which is reflected as capacitance at the terminals. In the same frequency range, the winding's own self-capacitance and leakage will become relevant, as well as complex wave effects; this, and laziness, are the reasons for the poor curve fit at high frequency.

You can also write a true diffusion component in SPICE: a frequency dependent resistance. (Coilcraft uses this element in their SPICE models.) Unfortunately, this has no concise time-domain representation (the Fourier transform is a sqrt function over all time, so SPICE can only solve it with a convolution, which has to be evaluated per timestep, and the convolution vector is as long as your simulation is...). In transient simulation, most simulators either ignore it, or go really slowly and give terrible numerical errors.

Tim

--
Seven Transistor Labs, LLC 
Electrical Engineering Consultation and Contract Design 
Website: http://seventransistorlabs.com
Reply to
Tim Williams
Loading thread data ...

Gahh. I would have done much better in an era where creative spelling was a mark of intelligence, rather than the current belief that it marks inattentiveness and sloth.

--
Tim Wescott 
Control systems, embedded software and circuit design 
I'm looking for work!  See my website if you're interested 
http://www.wescottdesign.com
Reply to
Tim Wescott

Search on "pink noise generator", and you should come up with a transfer function with an approximate 1/f frequency characteristic. Then synthesize an impedance with that transfer function.

IIRC it has alternating poles and zeros in some rational pattern, but I can't remember what they are because I needed to know for some one-off test and never used the knowledge again.

I'm not sure what you mean by "analytical approach" beyond this -- if you mean actually calculating the coil impedance from first principles, you probably can, but it would involve getting into the nitty-gritty of the eddy currents in the core, and if the core is just a mild steel screw or something, perhaps even hysteresis.

--

Tim Wescott 
Wescott Design Services 
http://www.wescottdesign.com 

I'm looking for work -- see my website!
Reply to
Tim Wescott

I is easy to get rough idea of ripple current by simple calculation. Taking 0.05H as inductance we get 20mA per msec per Volt increase in current. Using nominal +-1V at 1kHz with 50% duty we get

10mA linear increase and then 10mA linear decrease per period. so +-5mA deviation from average. Your data imply about 34 Ohm resistance at DC, so average current should be about 30 mA. So peak ripple is about 1/6 of average. Which leads to about 1% of power in ripple current.

Your 10*sqrt(f) reactance leads to 2/(5*sqrt(2))sqrt(t) current response to voltage unit step. This leads to

6.3mA peak to peak ripple and even smaller power in ripple current.

With smaller PWM duty factor of different frequency ripple will change but knowing unit step response one can easily estimate effects. What is worring is problem of adequacy of model. Your date seem to indicate that coil is mostly reactive, but error margin on resistance is quite high. As others wrote, saturation of the coil can significantly lower inductance, leading to much higher ripple compared to linear model.

--
                              Waldek Hebisch
Reply to
antispam

** The OP has stated there is no diode to supress flyback in his scheme, so your calc is out the window.

The guy is an total fruitcake.

.... Phil

Reply to
Phil Allison

Normally when PWMing a relay you would use a diode across it but he is driving this with a sinewave and inserting a source resistance for some unknown reason... So it shouldn't matter if a diode is used or not in this voltage divider case.

I PWM relays to reduce the power wasted in keeping it closed and it just works. With a diode of course.

boB

Reply to
boB

** Wrong.

The OP intends using PWM drive to the relay.

Sine wave tests are to establish the inductance of the coil.

** No the topic of my post nor the one I replied to.

When dealing with absurd posters, making sense of the thread becomes a major problem.

..... Phil

Reply to
Phil Allison

No wonder I couldn't figure this out. I score a 10 on the fruitcake index.

Reply to
motie

now that you know this, get back to work! ;)

Reply to
M Philbrook

ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.