I have observed that Hipersil core transformers have substantially more
volts per turn than conventional core transformers. This results in
them needing to use less wire to achieve the same secondary potential -
which means less ESR and less heat. Also, Pete Dahl told me that with
a conventional core, roughly half of the loss is Cu-loss and roughly
half the loss is core-loss, but with a Hipersil-core, virtually all of
the loss is Cu-loss.
On Apr 18, 2005, at 3:13 AM, G3rzp@aol.com wrote:
>
> In a message dated 18/04/2005 04:03:29 GMT Standard Time,
> craxd1@ezwv.com
> writes:
>
> Is an EI core better than a C-core?
>
> In my opinion, Yes! The reason being is the heat.
>
>
> All very interesting, and useful info. But for some reason, nearly all
> the
> military stuff over here has, for years, tended to use 'C' cores. I
> can see the
> weight saving for aircraft stuff, but why would the Navy be so keen
> if there
> weren't other advantages? Or the Army, bearing in mind that
> 'portable' to
> them tends to mean 3 men and a truck?
>
> I vaguely remember somewhere the claim that because the C cores are
> precision ground, the overall magnetic reluctrance is less.
>
> 73
>
> Peter G3RZP
> _______________________________________________
> Amps mailing list
> Amps@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps
>
>
Richard L. Measures, AG6K, 805.386.3734. www.somis.org
_______________________________________________
Amps mailing list
Amps@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps
|