OT eye candy

Sure -- here's the core (aha, with reference!):

  • Saturable Core Model, copied from:
  • _SPICE Models For Power Electronics_, Meares and Hymowitz.
  • .SUBCKT INDSAT 1 2 PARAMS: VSEC=1e-4 LMAG=1e-5 LSAT=1e-7 FEDDY=1e6 F1 1 2 VM1 1 G2 2 3 1 2 1 E1 4 2 3 2 1 VM1 4 5 0 RX 3 2 1E12 CB 3 2 {VSEC/500} IC=0 RB 5 2 {LMAG*500/VSEC} RS 5 6 {LSAT*500/VSEC} VP 7 2 250 VN 2 8 250 D1 6 7 DCLAMP D2 8 6 DCLAMP .MODEL DCLAMP D(CJO={3*VSEC/(6.28*FEDDY*500*LMAG)} VJ=25) .ENDS

A reasonable transformer model uses this saturable inductor as the primary inductance; a VCVS and CCCS "DC transformer" can do the ratio part, and you can add leakage in series, or use whatever model of mutual inductance you prefer. I'm leaving that stuff out, since it's personal preference how you might wish to construct it (in terms of k or LL, etc.). And "exercise for the student". ;)

The ratio between LMAG and LSAT is equal to the average permeability, so that a 10uH winding on a core of mu=100, when saturated, gives about

0.1uH, give or take leakage. Remember, more mu has almost no effect on leakage, but it increases k dramatically because it increases LMAG (the small signal inductance) dramatically. In practical terms, it changes

FEDDY is the eddy current frequency; this is somewhere around the point where, in the ferrite core's datasheet, you see mu' starting to roll off and mu'' peaking. I think I got reasonable agreement between simulated core losses and actual test results, between a Ferroxcube 3F3 core and FEDDY = 4M. The mu'' peak on the datasheet is something like 1 or 2MHz I think. Probably depends on Bpk used for the test, so you'll get best results from actual tests.

Tim

--
Deep Friar: a very philosophical monk. 
Website: http://seventransistorlabs.com 

"Fred Abse"  wrote in message  
news:pan.2012.12.10.09.17.25.88157@invalid.invalid... 
> On Sun, 09 Dec 2012 16:15:47 -0600, Tim Williams wrote: 
> 
>> "Fred Abse"  wrote in message 
>> news:pan.2012.12.08.11.25.22.996982@invalid.invalid... 
>>> On Fri, 07 Dec 2012 17:29:47 -0600, Tim Williams wrote: 
>>> 
>>>> 1T == 1 uWb 
>>>> mm^-2, A_e in mm^2, l_e in mm, mu_0 ~= 1.256nH/mm, etc. 
>>> 
>>> Be careful using the Spice Chan model. It uses meters and square  
>>> meters. 
>> 
>> Doesn't matter, I wrote my own (I think based on Chan).  It uses  
>> circuit 
>> values (Lp, Ls, k, mu, phi), so I don't even have to dick around with 
>> geometry.  ;-) 
>> 
> 
> Care to share it? 
> 
> --  
> "For a successful technology, reality must take precedence 
> over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled." 
>                                       (Richard Feynman)
Reply to
Tim Williams
Loading thread data ...

I have always mentally associated the multiplier with the number.

Which, of course, makes "kg" such an abomination of standardization. Go figure, the French, of all people, would demand a 1,000 times oversized hunk of precious metal! ;-)

As a result, I don't "get" why schools teach the multiplier with the unit, rigidly. So if you're working in km, "286,000 km" would seem just fine. Hey, it saves that tedious process of: "aw hell, how many thousands of M are in a k, and is it in the numerator or denominator? I have to multiply this!?"

It would be so much easier, and remove so much wasteful algorism*, if students were simply taught to shove the decimal three places up or down. It's very natural even coming from English (and other European) backgrounds: all the great numbers are specified in powers of 10^3 (thousand, million, billion, ...). Depending, of course, upon which "billion" you meant, but that's another worm can of its own.

*Of course, teachers *love* to teach algorism, especially when it's wasteful, because... what else would you do with an hour or two of class?

Tim

--
Deep Friar: a very philosophical monk. 
Website: http://seventransistorlabs.com
Reply to
Tim Williams

1024 if you're buying digital equipment, 1000 for analog.
Reply to
Ralph Barone

mm/s^2.

It is not that a really disagree with you, but there is a LOT of tradition even in electrical engineering (and moreso with the techs). I "grew up" with microfarads and micromicrofarads (mickeymikes/mmf). The usage of "mmf" faded with time to pf and nf, but mf still has not really caught on that well. One thing that annoys me is kilomicrofarads, arrrgh.

Gegen Dummheit kampfen die Gotter selbes vergabens.

?-)

Reply to
josephkk

down.

class?

EEEk you fool, we cannot have teachers explaining basic concepts or the relations between them. How could pundits control society then?

?;-)

Reply to
josephkk

Since 1998 the IEC says 1024 is expressed as "Ki"

Mark Zenier snipped-for-privacy@eskimo.com Googleproofaddress(account:mzenier provider:eskimo domain:com)

Reply to
Mark Zenier

Why should we listen to what the Iowa Egg Council has to say?

Reply to
Spehro Pefhany

On a sunny day (Wed, 12 Dec 2012 22:16:35 GMT) it happened snipped-for-privacy@eskimo.com (Mark Zenier) wrote in :

Kilo Current?

Reply to
Jan Panteltje

Well - the nice thing about metric is it's all based on decimal unlike the English system that uses factors from 1 through 5280.

Reply to
T

Thanks.

-- "For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled." (Richard Feynman)

Reply to
Fred Abse

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.