Thane Heins Perepiteia Replications

[minde4000]

I have grain oriented silicon MICROSIL .014  laminates. Could you tell me if they are suitable/lossy for this application?

http://www.magmet.com/tapewound/materials2.php
http://www.magmet.com/tapewound/microsil.php

Minde

[CRANKYpants]

I have grain oriented silicon MICROSIL .014  laminates. Could you tell me if they are suitable/lossy for this application?

http://www.magmet.com/tapewound/materials2.php
http://www.magmet.com/tapewound/microsil.php

Minde

I'M NO MAGNETICS DESIGNER BUT I LIKE THIS ONE...

Square 50 - 50% Ni/Fe/ alloy, (grain oriented). It offers the highest squareness ratio (lowest saturated reactance) and very high gain. This material has Bm while cores losses are low enough to consider its use in higher frequency applications than the silicon steels. Applications include bi-stable switching devices, inverter transformers, high performance power magnetic amplifiers, linear current transformers, timing devices, driver transformers, and wherever an extremely square loop material, manufactured to close tolerance, is required.

DON'T LIKE THIS ONE...

Microsil - 3% Si/Fe - Oriented Silicon Iron Alloy. This material is generally used for high power, relatively low frequency applications in high performance power transformers, saturable reactors, inverter transformers, magnetic amplifiers (power), current transformers, output transformers, etc. This is the least expensive of the square loop materials and has high maximum flux. The Squareness ratio is lower than for Square 50. The core losses are higher while gain is significantly lower.

AS I SAID EARLIER CORE CHOICE IS REALLY NOT AN ISSUE RIGHT NOW EXCEPT FOR YOUR HEATING PROBLEM WHICH SUGGESTS YOU NEED A HIGHER FREQUENCY CORE MATERIAL.

IT HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED ALREADY THAT MORE EFFICIENT - HIGHER GRADE CORES INCREASE OVERALL PERFORMANCE.

DO YOU HAVE THE MATERIAL NAME RATHER THAN JUST THE THICKNESS?

T

[minde4000]

DON'T LIKE THIS ONE...

Microsil - 3% Si/Fe - Oriented Silicon Iron Alloy. This material is generally used for high power, relatively low frequency applications in high performance power transformers, saturable reactors, inverter transformers, magnetic amplifiers (power), current transformers, output transformers, etc. This is the least expensive of the square loop materials and has high maximum flux. The Squareness ratio is lower than for Square 50. The core losses are higher while gain is significantly lower.

AS I SAID EARLIER CORE CHOICE IS REALLY NOT AN ISSUE RIGHT NOW EXCEPT FOR YOUR HEATING PROBLEM WHICH SUGGESTS YOU NEED A HIGHER FREQUENCY CORE MATERIAL.

IT HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED ALREADY THAT MORE EFFICIENT - HIGHER GRADE CORES INCREASE OVERALL PERFORMANCE.

DO YOU HAVE THE MATERIAL NAME RATHER THAN JUST THE THICKNESS?

T

Material name is MICROSIL.  I am gonna have to replace it with something better. It should yield overall better results than I have now with appearantly high core losses when circuit is open.  Would you recommend any other web sites besides magnetic metals?

@Baroutologos

Sorry if I missed in any of your post but what core material are you using?

Minde

[baroutologos]

Hello Minde,

My coils are I-core elongated from sound equipment. they are 0.3mm, premium quality laminations (claimed) so as to operate without sound distortion at low Khz range. They are rated 500 watts of power.

I am not expert about laminations. But I think its more than fine.

My losses anyway due to cogging torque and eddie/hysteresis etc so far is 7-8 watts for two coils, at low speed range and lower at high speed range. (cogging is the issue not eddies/hysteresis)

Regards,
Baroutologos

[baroutologos]

Lecturing 101,

It has been well observed that accelaration of a passive power-generating coil (when current is allowed to flow through it) can be manifested under certain conditions.

If those conditions are not met, the current flowing creates drag that limits rotation as we all know.

It has also been well observed (not by me so far) that if we have many non-accelarating coils in the same rotor and same phase and connected in series, althouth each one unable to manifest accelaration, all together combined they accelarate just fine.

Perhaps this is another minor issue of great importance to investigate??

Deciphering the patents of old timers
..................................................
If we take a look at the machines and patents of Bedini, Adams, Kromrey, Muller and so on and so forth, we find a consistent pattern.

MANY COILS ARRANGED IN SERIES. We can assume two things.
1) These inventors never happen to perceive the merits of many turns single coil accelaration
or
2) They have concluded that by series connected, lesser turns coils, is the optimum way anyone to go for power out.

I tend to believe, the second approach and this i am gonna pursue after the multi strand experiments.
Of course, cogging will become THE ISSUE there, but as a saying goes, no pain-no gain

Your views pls,

Regards,
Baroutologos