• transformer core material

    From Tom Del Rosso@21:1/5 to All on Tue Aug 24 04:44:02 2021
    AIUI you use iron cores for low frequency and ferrite for high frequency because ferrite doesn't get magnetized, so why couldn't aluminum do the
    same?


    --
    Defund the Thought Police

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Phil Allison@21:1/5 to Tom Del Rosso on Tue Aug 24 02:32:45 2021
    Tom Del Rosso wrote:
    ==================

    AIUI you use iron cores for low frequency and ferrite for high frequency because ferrite doesn't get magnetized,

    ** LOL - wrong.

    Most loudspeakers use FERRITE magnets !


    so why couldn't aluminum do the same?

    ** Or a piece of wood ?

    FYI

    the whole point of a core is that it DOES get magnetised.
    And as easily as possible and with the least energy losses when cycled in each direction.
    Iron / Silicon alloys are is the only materials that do that well at low frequencies.

    Ferrite has very low losses at at ALL frequencies but cannot compare with iron at low ones for sheer brute force.


    .... Phil

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Jeroen Belleman@21:1/5 to Tom Del Rosso on Tue Aug 24 15:01:13 2021
    Tom Del Rosso wrote:
    AIUI you use iron cores for low frequency and ferrite for high frequency because ferrite doesn't get magnetized, so why couldn't aluminum do the
    same?

    You *want* a transformer core to be easily magnetized! You don't
    want it to *stay* magnetized when the current goes to zero.

    Iron is good in low-frequency transformers because it has a high
    saturation field and high permeability, so you can get away with
    relatively few turns for the windings. Its disadvantage is that it
    is conductive, so there will be eddy current losses, which get
    rapidly worse with higher frequency. Those losses can be reduced
    by making the core out of thin insulated laminations, but this
    gets impractical quite fast.

    Ferrite has a lower permeability and lower saturation field, but
    it's an insulator, so it doesn't sustain eddy currents.

    That's the simple view. Magnetic materials are complicated and
    lots of effort has been spent on finding the best materials for
    specific applications. There are hundreds of different kinds of
    magnetic materials, maybe thousands.

    Jeroen Belleman

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Phil Allison@21:1/5 to Jeroen Belleman on Wed Aug 25 00:40:56 2021
    Jeroen Belleman wrote:
    ===================

    Iron is good in low-frequency transformers because it has a high
    saturation field and high permeability, so you can get away with
    relatively few turns for the windings. Its disadvantage is that it
    is conductive, so there will be eddy current losses, which get
    rapidly worse with higher frequency. Those losses can be reduced
    by making the core out of thin insulated laminations, but this
    gets impractical quite fast.


    ** Typical iron core transformers intended for 50/60 Hz can be used to 20kHz and beyond with no such issue.
    As the operating frequency rises, core magnetisation falls cancelling any rise in losses.



    ....... Phil

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Jeroen Belleman@21:1/5 to Phil Allison on Wed Aug 25 11:35:32 2021
    Phil Allison wrote:
    Jeroen Belleman wrote:
    ===================
    Iron is good in low-frequency transformers because it has a high
    saturation field and high permeability, so you can get away with
    relatively few turns for the windings. Its disadvantage is that it
    is conductive, so there will be eddy current losses, which get
    rapidly worse with higher frequency. Those losses can be reduced
    by making the core out of thin insulated laminations, but this
    gets impractical quite fast.


    ** Typical iron core transformers intended for 50/60 Hz can be used to 20kHz and beyond with no such issue.
    As the operating frequency rises, core magnetisation falls cancelling any rise in losses.



    ....... Phil

    Why isn't laminated iron good for RF transformer cores then?

    Jeroen Belleman

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Phil Allison@21:1/5 to Jeroen Belleman on Wed Aug 25 03:04:13 2021
    Jeroen Belleman wrote:
    Phil Allison wrote:
    -----------------------------------------
    Iron is good in low-frequency transformers because it has a high
    saturation field and high permeability, so you can get away with
    relatively few turns for the windings. Its disadvantage is that it
    is conductive, so there will be eddy current losses, which get
    rapidly worse with higher frequency. Those losses can be reduced
    by making the core out of thin insulated laminations, but this
    gets impractical quite fast.


    ** Typical iron core transformers intended for 50/60 Hz can be used to 20kHz and beyond with no such issue.
    As the operating frequency rises, core magnetisation falls cancelling any rise in losses.


    Why isn't laminated iron good for RF transformer cores then?

    ** You have misunderstood my post.




    ...... Phil

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Jeroen Belleman@21:1/5 to Phil Allison on Wed Aug 25 14:36:37 2021
    Phil Allison wrote:
    Jeroen Belleman wrote:
    Phil Allison wrote:
    -----------------------------------------
    Iron is good in low-frequency transformers because it has a high
    saturation field and high permeability, so you can get away with
    relatively few turns for the windings. Its disadvantage is that it
    is conductive, so there will be eddy current losses, which get
    rapidly worse with higher frequency. Those losses can be reduced
    by making the core out of thin insulated laminations, but this
    gets impractical quite fast.

    ** Typical iron core transformers intended for 50/60 Hz can be used to 20kHz and beyond with no such issue.
    As the operating frequency rises, core magnetisation falls cancelling any rise in losses.
    Why isn't laminated iron good for RF transformer cores then?

    ** You have misunderstood my post.

    ...... Phil


    It's true I assumed constant Bmax. I should have said so.
    Constant voltage, as you assumed, is indeed more natural.

    I measured the frequency response of a few iron core
    transformers: A 75VA rectangular-core worked well up
    to 40kHz, while a similar sized toroid went up to only
    about 10kHz (-3dB), measured between the two independent
    15V windings of each. This was with a tiny excitation
    voltage, which may mess up the results.

    Jeroen Belleman

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Jeroen Belleman@21:1/5 to Phil Allison on Thu Aug 26 00:05:18 2021
    On 2021-08-25 23:21, Phil Allison wrote:
    Jeroen Belleman wrote:
    ==================

    ** Typical iron core transformers intended for 50/60 Hz can be used to 20kHz and beyond with no such issue.
    As the operating frequency rises, core magnetisation falls cancelling any rise in losses.
    Why isn't laminated iron good for RF transformer cores then?

    ** You have misunderstood my post.


    It's true I assumed constant Bmax. I should have said so.
    Constant voltage, as you assumed, is indeed more natural.

    ** Well, I deal lot with audio transformers - from mic input to hundreds of watts.


    I measured the frequency response of a few iron core
    transformers: A 75VA rectangular-core worked well up
    to 40kHz,

    ** Yep. Audio output types go to about 60kHz or more.


    while a similar sized toroid went up to only
    about 10kHz (-3dB), measured between the two independent
    15V windings of each.

    ** That is odd, toroidals are usually the best with -3dB responses to 100kHz.
    Just the fact the secondary is wound all over the primary does the trick.

    What cannot be done is having a tiny laminated iron core running at 100kHz and high power.

    As well as ferrite there are "powdered iron" cores and toroids that will. Another material is "amorphous steel" which as very low losses.


    ...... Phil




    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Phil Allison@21:1/5 to Jeroen Belleman on Wed Aug 25 14:21:16 2021
    Jeroen Belleman wrote:
    ==================

    ** Typical iron core transformers intended for 50/60 Hz can be used to 20kHz and beyond with no such issue.
    As the operating frequency rises, core magnetisation falls cancelling any rise in losses.
    Why isn't laminated iron good for RF transformer cores then?

    ** You have misunderstood my post.


    It's true I assumed constant Bmax. I should have said so.
    Constant voltage, as you assumed, is indeed more natural.

    ** Well, I deal lot with audio transformers - from mic input to hundreds of watts.


    I measured the frequency response of a few iron core
    transformers: A 75VA rectangular-core worked well up
    to 40kHz,

    ** Yep. Audio output types go to about 60kHz or more.


    while a similar sized toroid went up to only
    about 10kHz (-3dB), measured between the two independent
    15V windings of each.

    ** That is odd, toroidals are usually the best with -3dB responses to 100kHz.
    Just the fact the secondary is wound all over the primary does the trick.

    What cannot be done is having a tiny laminated iron core running at 100kHz and high power.

    As well as ferrite there are "powdered iron" cores and toroids that will. Another material is "amorphous steel" which as very low losses.


    ...... Phil

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Jeroen Belleman@21:1/5 to Phil Allison on Thu Aug 26 00:24:50 2021
    On 2021-08-25 23:21, Phil Allison wrote:
    Jeroen Belleman wrote:
    ==================

    ** Typical iron core transformers intended for 50/60 Hz can be used to 20kHz and beyond with no such issue.
    As the operating frequency rises, core magnetisation falls cancelling any rise in losses.
    Why isn't laminated iron good for RF transformer cores then?

    ** You have misunderstood my post.


    It's true I assumed constant Bmax. I should have said so.
    Constant voltage, as you assumed, is indeed more natural.

    ** Well, I deal lot with audio transformers - from mic input to hundreds of watts.


    I measured the frequency response of a few iron core
    transformers: A 75VA rectangular-core worked well up
    to 40kHz,

    ** Yep. Audio output types go to about 60kHz or more.


    while a similar sized toroid went up to only
    about 10kHz (-3dB), measured between the two independent
    15V windings of each.

    ** That is odd, toroidals are usually the best with -3dB responses to 100kHz.
    Just the fact the secondary is wound all over the primary does the trick.

    It surprised me too. I also measured an inter-winding capacitance of
    2nF, which strikes me as high. The drop-off was a resonance dip.


    What cannot be done is having a tiny laminated iron core running at 100kHz and high power.

    As well as ferrite there are "powdered iron" cores and toroids that will. Another material is "amorphous steel" which as very low losses.

    I use transformers for RF. I've used ferrite, of course, but also metglas
    and similar materials. The cores are mostly there for the low end of the frequency range. Beyond a few MHz, you really want to keep the flux out
    of the core, which is done by using transmission lines for the windings.
    Some of my transformers are good to 9GHz, but those bear little resemblance
    to a traditional wound transformer.

    Jeroen Belleman

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Phil Allison@21:1/5 to Jeroen Belleman on Wed Aug 25 17:39:54 2021
    Jeroen Belleman wrote:
    ====================

    ** That is odd, toroidals are usually the best with -3dB responses to 100kHz.
    Just the fact the secondary is wound all over the primary does the trick.

    It surprised me too. I also measured an inter-winding capacitance of
    2nF, which strikes me as high. The drop-off was a resonance dip.

    ** You did have a suitable resistive load on the secondary ??



    ...... Phil

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tom Del Rosso@21:1/5 to Jeroen Belleman on Wed Aug 25 22:25:13 2021
    Jeroen Belleman wrote:
    Tom Del Rosso wrote:
    AIUI you use iron cores for low frequency and ferrite for high
    frequency because ferrite doesn't get magnetized, so why couldn't
    aluminum do the same?

    You *want* a transformer core to be easily magnetized! You don't
    want it to *stay* magnetized when the current goes to zero.

    Of course that's what I meant. It has to conduct a magnetic field but it
    must not fight the induced field when it reverses.

    I asked about the behavior of ferrite vs aluminum.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Jeroen Belleman@21:1/5 to Tom Del Rosso on Thu Aug 26 08:26:48 2021
    On 2021-08-26 04:25, Tom Del Rosso wrote:
    Jeroen Belleman wrote:
    Tom Del Rosso wrote:
    AIUI you use iron cores for low frequency and ferrite for high
    frequency because ferrite doesn't get magnetized, so why couldn't
    aluminum do the same?

    You *want* a transformer core to be easily magnetized! You don't
    want it to *stay* magnetized when the current goes to zero.

    Of course that's what I meant. It has to conduct a magnetic field but it
    must not fight the induced field when it reverses.

    I asked about the behavior of ferrite vs aluminum.



    The short answer is that aluminium is worse than nothing as a
    transformer core. It *will* fight changing fields.

    Jeroen Belleman

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Jeroen Belleman@21:1/5 to Phil Allison on Thu Aug 26 08:18:52 2021
    On 2021-08-26 02:39, Phil Allison wrote:
    Jeroen Belleman wrote:
    ====================

    ** That is odd, toroidals are usually the best with -3dB responses to 100kHz.
    Just the fact the secondary is wound all over the primary does the trick. >>
    It surprised me too. I also measured an inter-winding capacitance of
    2nF, which strikes me as high. The drop-off was a resonance dip.

    ** You did have a suitable resistive load on the secondary ??


    Just the 50 Ohm ports of my network analyzer.

    Jeroen Belleman

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Jeroen Belleman@21:1/5 to Phil Allison on Thu Aug 26 08:56:10 2021
    On 2021-08-26 08:36, Phil Allison wrote:
    Jeroen Belleman wrote:
    ===================

    ** You did have a suitable resistive load on the secondary ??

    Just the 50 Ohm ports of my network analyzer.


    ** So you paralled the windings or had them in series ?

    15V or 30 V ?

    Suitable = close to full VA *if* the primary was operated at rated V.

    Unloaded trannys always ring like a bell.

    An RF network analyzer is a voltage source with a 50 ohm internal
    impedance and a receiver with another 50 Ohm internal impedance.
    I connected the source to one of the 15V windings of my transformer
    and the receiver to the other. The source voltage is well below 1V
    rms. Pretty far from the normal operating conditions of the transformer,
    is true.

    Jeroen Belleman

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Phil Allison@21:1/5 to Jeroen Belleman on Wed Aug 25 23:36:56 2021
    Jeroen Belleman wrote:
    ===================

    ** You did have a suitable resistive load on the secondary ??

    Just the 50 Ohm ports of my network analyzer.


    ** So you paralled the windings or had them in series ?

    15V or 30 V ?

    Suitable = close to full VA *if* the primary was operated at rated V.

    Unloaded trannys always ring like a bell.


    ...... Phil

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Phil Allison@21:1/5 to Jeroen Belleman on Thu Aug 26 00:10:26 2021
    Jeroen Belleman wrote:
    ===================


    An RF network analyzer is a voltage source with a 50 ohm internal
    impedance and a receiver with another 50 Ohm internal impedance.
    I connected the source to one of the 15V windings of my transformer
    and the receiver to the other. The source voltage is well below 1V
    rms. Pretty far from the normal operating conditions of the transformer,
    is true.

    ** Drive voltage makes no difference at mid and high frequencies.
    Only a low ones when approaching core saturation.
    Toridals use GOSS wound cores with tiny Imags.

    Fun fact:

    GOSS = grain oriented silicon steel.
    First invented by an engineer who's surname was Goss.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_P._Goss


    ..... Phil

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tom Del Rosso@21:1/5 to Jeroen Belleman on Fri Aug 27 02:07:01 2021
    Jeroen Belleman wrote:
    On 2021-08-26 04:25, Tom Del Rosso wrote:
    Jeroen Belleman wrote:
    Tom Del Rosso wrote:
    AIUI you use iron cores for low frequency and ferrite for high
    frequency because ferrite doesn't get magnetized, so why couldn't
    aluminum do the same?

    You *want* a transformer core to be easily magnetized! You don't
    want it to *stay* magnetized when the current goes to zero.

    Of course that's what I meant. It has to conduct a magnetic field
    but it must not fight the induced field when it reverses.

    I asked about the behavior of ferrite vs aluminum.



    The short answer is that aluminium is worse than nothing as a
    transformer core. It *will* fight changing fields.

    That implies that it will "stay magnetized" as you put it, so the answer
    is too short but thanks for trying.


    --
    Defund the Thought Police

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Jeroen Belleman@21:1/5 to Tom Del Rosso on Fri Aug 27 10:52:56 2021
    On 2021-08-27 08:07, Tom Del Rosso wrote:
    Jeroen Belleman wrote:
    On 2021-08-26 04:25, Tom Del Rosso wrote:
    Jeroen Belleman wrote:
    Tom Del Rosso wrote:
    AIUI you use iron cores for low frequency and ferrite for high
    frequency because ferrite doesn't get magnetized, so why couldn't
    aluminum do the same?

    You *want* a transformer core to be easily magnetized! You don't
    want it to *stay* magnetized when the current goes to zero.

    Of course that's what I meant. It has to conduct a magnetic field
    but it must not fight the induced field when it reverses.

    I asked about the behavior of ferrite vs aluminum.



    The short answer is that aluminium is worse than nothing as a
    transformer core. It *will* fight changing fields.

    That implies that it will "stay magnetized" as you put it, so the answer
    is too short but thanks for trying.



    Aluminium is a good conductor. There will be eddy currents induced
    in it that will oppose any /change/ of magnetic field. Lenz law and
    all that.But once external fields are removed and enough time has
    passed for eddy currents to decay, there will be no field left over.

    Jeroen Belleman

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Phil Allison@21:1/5 to Tom Del Rosso Total Fuckhead on Fri Aug 27 02:42:36 2021
    Tom Del Rosso Total Fuckhead wrote:
    ============================

    The short answer is that aluminium is worse than nothing as a
    transformer core. It *will* fight changing fields.

    That implies that it will "stay magnetized" as you put it, so the answer
    is too short but thanks for trying.


    ** FUCK OFF you vile, arrogant, POS, wog asshole

    Never dream of coming back.




    ..... Phil

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From --- -.dotat@21:1/5 to fizzbintuesday@that-google-mail-dom on Fri Aug 27 12:29:11 2021
    On Tue, 24 Aug 2021 04:44:02 -0400, "Tom Del Rosso" <fizzbintuesday@that-google-mail-domain.com> wrote:

    AIUI you use iron cores for low frequency and ferrite for high frequency >because ferrite doesn't get magnetized, so why couldn't aluminum do the
    same?
    An aluminium core would act as a short circuit.
    Will heat up and eventually melt.

    w.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tom Del Rosso@21:1/5 to Helmut Wabnig on Fri Aug 27 08:38:44 2021
    Helmut Wabnig wrote:
    On Tue, 24 Aug 2021 04:44:02 -0400, "Tom Del Rosso" <fizzbintuesday@that-google-mail-domain.com> wrote:

    AIUI you use iron cores for low frequency and ferrite for high
    frequency because ferrite doesn't get magnetized, so why couldn't
    aluminum do the same?
    An aluminium core would act as a short circuit.
    Will heat up and eventually melt.

    More so than an iron core?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tom Del Rosso@21:1/5 to Jeroen Belleman on Fri Aug 27 08:37:56 2021
    Jeroen Belleman wrote:
    On 2021-08-27 08:07, Tom Del Rosso wrote:
    Jeroen Belleman wrote:
    On 2021-08-26 04:25, Tom Del Rosso wrote:
    Jeroen Belleman wrote:
    Tom Del Rosso wrote:
    AIUI you use iron cores for low frequency and ferrite for high
    frequency because ferrite doesn't get magnetized, so why couldn't
    aluminum do the same?

    You *want* a transformer core to be easily magnetized! You don't
    want it to *stay* magnetized when the current goes to zero.

    Of course that's what I meant. It has to conduct a magnetic field
    but it must not fight the induced field when it reverses.

    I asked about the behavior of ferrite vs aluminum.



    The short answer is that aluminium is worse than nothing as a
    transformer core. It *will* fight changing fields.

    That implies that it will "stay magnetized" as you put it, so the
    answer is too short but thanks for trying.



    Aluminium is a good conductor. There will be eddy currents induced
    in it that will oppose any /change/ of magnetic field. Lenz law and
    all that.But once external fields are removed and enough time has
    passed for eddy currents to decay, there will be no field left over.

    I know what you mean, but since the current only has the length of the
    core to travel it's hard to grasp how that produces more than a very
    short pulse.

    --
    Defund the Thought Police

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tom Del Rosso@21:1/5 to Phil Allison on Fri Aug 27 08:40:13 2021
    Phil Allison wrote:
    Tom Del Rosso Total Fuckhead wrote:
    ============================

    The short answer is that aluminium is worse than nothing as a
    transformer core. It *will* fight changing fields.

    That implies that it will "stay magnetized" as you put it, so the
    answer is too short but thanks for trying.


    ** FUCK OFF you vile, arrogant, POS, wog asshole

    Never dream of coming back.




    ..... Phil

    HI PHIL!

    You know, in that study you're involved in, I think you're getting the
    placebo.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tom Del Rosso@21:1/5 to Helmut Wabnig on Fri Aug 27 08:47:39 2021
    Helmut Wabnig wrote:
    On Tue, 24 Aug 2021 04:44:02 -0400, "Tom Del Rosso" <fizzbintuesday@that-google-mail-domain.com> wrote:

    AIUI you use iron cores for low frequency and ferrite for high
    frequency because ferrite doesn't get magnetized, so why couldn't
    aluminum do the same?
    An aluminium core would act as a short circuit.
    Will heat up and eventually melt.

    Is that so even if we assume that it's laminated?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Jasen Betts@21:1/5 to Tom Del Rosso on Fri Aug 27 15:37:35 2021
    On 2021-08-27, Tom Del Rosso <fizzbintuesday@that-google-mail-domain.com> wrote:
    Helmut Wabnig wrote:
    On Tue, 24 Aug 2021 04:44:02 -0400, "Tom Del Rosso"
    <fizzbintuesday@that-google-mail-domain.com> wrote:

    AIUI you use iron cores for low frequency and ferrite for high
    frequency because ferrite doesn't get magnetized, so why couldn't
    aluminum do the same?
    An aluminium core would act as a short circuit.
    Will heat up and eventually melt.

    More so than an iron core?

    what else being equal?

    --
    Jasen.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Jeroen Belleman@21:1/5 to Tom Del Rosso on Fri Aug 27 21:33:13 2021
    On 2021-08-27 14:37, Tom Del Rosso wrote:
    Jeroen Belleman wrote:
    On 2021-08-27 08:07, Tom Del Rosso wrote:
    Jeroen Belleman wrote:
    On 2021-08-26 04:25, Tom Del Rosso wrote:
    Jeroen Belleman wrote:
    Tom Del Rosso wrote:
    AIUI you use iron cores for low frequency and ferrite for high
    frequency because ferrite doesn't get magnetized, so why couldn't >>>>>>> aluminum do the same?

    You *want* a transformer core to be easily magnetized! You don't
    want it to *stay* magnetized when the current goes to zero.

    Of course that's what I meant. It has to conduct a magnetic field
    but it must not fight the induced field when it reverses.

    I asked about the behavior of ferrite vs aluminum.



    The short answer is that aluminium is worse than nothing as a
    transformer core. It *will* fight changing fields.

    That implies that it will "stay magnetized" as you put it, so the
    answer is too short but thanks for trying.



    Aluminium is a good conductor. There will be eddy currents induced
    in it that will oppose any /change/ of magnetic field. Lenz law and
    all that.But once external fields are removed and enough time has
    passed for eddy currents to decay, there will be no field left over.

    I know what you mean, but since the current only has the length of the
    core to travel it's hard to grasp how that produces more than a very
    short pulse.


    I'm getting a bit tired of this. Learn about magnetic fields in
    conductors. You're in for some surprises, I'm sure.

    Jeroen Belleman

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Phil Allison@21:1/5 to All on Fri Aug 27 16:02:47 2021
    Tom Del Rosso = TROLLING FUCKWIT ASSHOLE ====================================

    ** FUCK OFF you vile, arrogant, POS, wog asshole

    Never dream of coming back.


    HI PHIL!

    You know, in that study you're involved in, I think you're getting the placebo.

    ** Hi Tom,

    know that brain tumor you have ?
    Are you enjoying your daily seizures ?


    ..... Phil

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tom Del Rosso@21:1/5 to Jeroen Belleman on Sat Aug 28 07:58:57 2021
    Jeroen Belleman wrote:

    I'm getting a bit tired of this. Learn about magnetic fields in
    conductors. You're in for some surprises, I'm sure.

    That's fine. You don't have to answer at all. I don't know why people
    enter a 'basics' group though, if not for basic questions.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From whit3rd@21:1/5 to Tom Del Rosso on Sat Sep 11 11:04:44 2021
    On Friday, August 27, 2021 at 5:38:01 AM UTC-7, Tom Del Rosso wrote:
    Jeroen Belleman wrote:
    On 2021-08-27 08:07, Tom Del Rosso wrote:
    Jeroen Belleman wrote:
    On 2021-08-26 04:25, Tom Del Rosso wrote:
    Jeroen Belleman wrote:
    Tom Del Rosso wrote:
    AIUI you use iron cores for low frequency and ferrite for high
    frequency because ferrite doesn't get magnetized, so why couldn't >>>>>> aluminum do the same?

    The short answer is that aluminium is worse than nothing as a
    transformer core. It *will* fight changing fields.


    Aluminium is a good conductor. There will be eddy currents induced
    in it that will oppose any /change/ of magnetic field. Lenz law and
    all that.But once external fields are removed and enough time has
    passed for eddy currents to decay, there will be no field left over.

    I know what you mean, but since the current only has the length of the
    core to travel it's hard to grasp how that produces more than a very
    short pulse.

    The problem that a core solves, is flux coupling in multiple windings. The magnetizability of a core means that it contains and directs almost all the magnetic flux.
    A conductor will exclude flux, which is counterproductive; even the conductivity
    of iron is detrimental (so lamination, or iron powder, or nonconducting ferrite is
    employed).

    In induction motors, where the flux is intended NOT to change in the rotor (so the
    alternation of current rotates the rotor instead of changing its magnetization) there
    are aluminum parts to enhance the available torque.

    When/if you don't allow the rotor to move, those rotors burn up. Almost all induction motors have
    thermal protection components that open if/when the motor is stalled.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)