Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"
|    alt.engineering.electrical    |    Electrical engineering discussion forum    |    2,547 messages    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
|    Message 1,306 of 2,547    |
|    tctomcosby@hotmail.com to BillyFish    |
|    Re: Transformer theory--THE ANSWER    |
|    26 Sep 14 04:25:30    |
      On Saturday, December 11, 1999 3:00:00 AM UTC-5, BillyFish wrote:       > Essentially, the following problem was posed on this newsgroup:       > ***************       > Consider a transformer wound on a large toroidal core using a high        > permeability material so that very little magnetic field is outside the       core.        > That is, there is little leakage reactance. Put a primary winding along a        > small length around the circumference of the core. Put a similar secondary        > winding on the diametrically opposite of the primary. Connect the primary       to        > a low impedance ac power source and the secondary to a variable resistance        > load. As the load resistance changes, current in the primary and secondary        > changes in such a way as to keep the flux in the core relatively constant.       >        > Using the Poynting theorem, for example, how does power get transferred from        > the primary to the secondary? The flux in the core is not greatly affected        > by the power. That flux is also longitudinal. There is no change in the E        > field. The same voltage is across each winding at low and high loads.       >        > Suppose you set up a plane symmetrically between the two winding cutting the        > core into two halves. If you integrate the Poynting vector over this plane,        > I do not see that the E x H to be very different for high and low resistive        > loads. There is no physical current flow across the plane other than        > displacement current.       > **********       > This problem vexed me. After I got up to go to the bathroom last night, I       > could not go back to sleep. I pondered the problem, and I believe I have the       > answer. It was partially formed in a conversation with someone who had some       > glimmerings but not the full insight. The description above is, not       > surprisingly, a *red herring*.       >        > One key to the problem is to realize that the leakage reactance of a       > transformer is *independent *of the core! The core increases the magnetizing       > inductance and coupling coefficient but has NO effect on the leakage       reactance.       > This is well known to designers of pulse transformers, for example. In       > equivalent circuit diagrams, current from the primary to the secondary       > transfers *through* the leakage reactance. Most transformer engineers do not       > think in terms of Poynting's theorem.       >        > In a transformer as described above, the main portions of the core, that are       > not covered by windings, act as two pole pieces. A magnetic field component       > fringes between them. It is driven by the bucking currents flowing in the       two       > windings producing an H field proportional to the ampere turns in each       winding.       > This H cannot be reduced by using a high permeability core material. The       core       > enables this leakage field to be distributed over a larger volume. Without       > this core, the leakage would be local to the individual windings. This H       field       > produced by opposing currents in the primary and secondary windings. It       > provides an H that can be crossed with an E field to give a power transfer       from       > primary to secondary.       >        > Where does the E field to do this come from? The magnetic field B through       the       > core is proportional to the voltage across the primary and secondary and 90       > degrees out of phase with this voltage. According to Faraday's law, this       flux       > produces an E field through the core hole proportional to the rate of change       of       > flux inside the core. Thus, this E field is proportional to the voltage in       > each winding and 90 degrees out of phase with the flux. The result is that       the       > transverse components of the E and H fields, for resistive loads, are in       phase       > and contribute to a real transfer of power from primary to secondary.       >        > I do not know if this description for energy transfer has ever been presented       > before.       >        > William Buchman              OK, if I misquoted you, my apology. If you accept the poynting theorem and       truly believe it to be a valid representation of energy flow, it would be       impossible to not see the role of the "Leakage Flux" in the process. I think,       although at this late stage,        I don't think it would ever happen, what we call        "leakage flux" should be tagged with a different name. it is NOT DEPENDENT ON       CORE PERMEABILITY ! Also, regardless of the air space between windings,       leakage flux energy does not change,(with a given load), only the intensity       changes, if the geometry        changes. Perhaps, the better way to the truth is to explore the energy path in       your version of the truth. That is to say, if you are so convinced leakage       flux plays no role in energy transfer, tell me, first in Plain English, how       the energy in the iron        core transformer is transferred from primary winding to the secondary. The       necessary math is OK, but I am skeptical of any explanations using only       math...They sometimes give us correct dimensions and answers, but with no real       UNDERSTANDING of the process.       .. I remain....              --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05        * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
(c) 1994, bbs@darkrealms.ca