Amps
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Amps] Microwave Oven Autopsy

To: amps@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [Amps] Microwave Oven Autopsy
From: "Will Matney" <craxd1@verizon.net>
Reply-to: craxd1@verizon.net
Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 23:36:49 -0500
List-post: <mailto:amps@contesting.com>
Tomm,

That's what I was remembering that they were actually regulating by using a 
ferro-resonant transformer (using a shunt). Without the shunt of course, you 
have a regular EI core, or close to it. However, for that power output, it's 
still going to saturate at 1 kW which was wanted the other way around. Plus 
pulsing it helped keep it cooler. My guess is that this one wouldn't be able to 
do but about 500 watts if that. The windows will not be totally filled, and 
that will raise the losses some too, I'm not sure to what extent. Mainly, 
that's just an added longer magnetic path length than necessary. If it were 
filled full of the coil, it would help distribute it out. That comes into 
figuring power by the WA method. The older microwave transformers had through 
bolts in them. Some were welded, but only with one weld on the top and bottom. 
This one here had 4 welds if I recall, and no bolt holes. Those welds though 
will raise the losses too. I'd say they're welded via robots or an aut
 omatic machine to save on cost where the bolts would have been put in by hand. 
That's a fault I have with Miller welding machines as they've been welding on 
the cores in them. Of course, Lincoln, ESAB, and Hobart might be doing it now 
too as I've not seen inside any in years. Re-winding welder transformers used 
to be a good business. I hope maybe some on here may locate a certain brand of 
microwave that the transformer could be rewound easier than this one. 
Especially still have through bolts in it.

A person can go backwards on the quick formula to figure power. The formula 
which I re-figured for 12 kilogauss, instead of 75 kilolines (11,626 gauss), at 
60 Hz is;

A = 0.1725 x Sq Rt of P

P = ( A  / 0.1725 )^2

For 500 watts at 12 kg, 60 Hz;

A = 0.1725 x sq rt of 500 watts

A = 0.1725 x 22.3607 = 3.8572 Sq Inches

or;

P = ( 3.8572 / 0.1725 )^2

P = 22.3606^2 = 499.99 or 500 watts


The only other problem would be the turns per volt that they have. The turns 
per volt for 12 kg, 60 Hz is;

TPV = 4.85 / A

TPV = 4.85 / 3.8572 = 1.257

115 Vac x 1.257 = 144.5 or 144 turns.

I think his was less than that which would raise the flux density I'm thinking 
because the magnetizing current will go up, and flux density goes up with it.

==== For 50 Hz ====

TPV = 5.82 / A

A = 0.207 x sq rt of P

Where;

P = power in watts

A = area in square inches

TPV = turns per volt


Best,

Will

PS: Tomm, I purposely bought those Panasonic DSO's to study surge current in a 
transformer, and to look into using a reactor, or using a partly gapped core to 
control it. I think you were the one that did the one test? If you still have 
the pic of that surge current wave from the scope, I'd like to get it as it was 
lost when this computer crashed months back. 



*********** REPLY SEPARATOR  ***********

On 3/16/06 at 3:07 AM KD7QAE wrote:

>Actually, the microwave oven transformers are true engineering marvels 
>in which the $2 technology was delivered for $1 safely and effectively.  
>Most of these transformers are ferroresonant types which rely on 
>saturation to regulate the output voltage.  Ferroresonant transformers 
>will run quite hot as the core losses are 2 to 4x per pound those of 
>high quality linear transformers but they do the one thing that no 
>linear transformer can do, deliver a constant voltage with no active 
>devices. 
>
>Tomm
>
>Will Matney wrote:
>
>>Marv,
>>
>>I can see what they're doing, probably running the transformer and tube
>maybe at 25% duty cycle by pulsing it. The thing is, even doing this, the
>transformer is going into saturation most likely. Hipersil or M-6 states
>that it can be ran up to 17 kilogauss (max), but they recommend 15
>kilogauss. The reason being is that after 15 kg, the magnetizing current
>starts to raise rapidly, and that means the permeability will go to crap.
>That goes into what they call incremental permeability when the straight
>line starts to bend over into a knee and at some point in higher flux
>density, it will top out and begin a sharp fall. At the top of course is
>the highest permeability that can be reached but is well out of the linear
>region of either it or flux density. When they do the test to obtain a BH
>curve using a hysteresis loop tracer (The BH curve is inside 1/2 the
>hysteresis loop and divides it in half), and a scope, the curve pattern
>will go up linearly, then bend to a knee, keep goi
> n
>> g to a point until it takes a sharp nose dive back to the start then
>form the negative portion of the waveform. That sharp point is saturation.
>Believe it or not, it is around 20 kilogauss at this tip on a lot of
>material, but the permeability has fallen off so low that the primary
>looks almost like a short (but not quite enough current to be one) to the
>line because of the very high magnetizing current. They rate material at a
>point on down the curve, but above the start of the upper knee for maximum
>flux density. Also, design says your better to run a transformer at a flux
>density just below the knee. That is the linear region, and is just below
>where maximum permeability is, and that's below the curve where
>incremental permeability is. To find maximum permeability on a BH curve,
>you look and see there's two knees. There's a small lower knee where the
>curve starts, then almost a straight leaning line, and at last the line
>forms into a curve again being the upper knee. If 
> y
>> ou draw a straight line from the point where the BH curve starts (where
>the lower knee begins at 0), and go towards the upper knee with it until
>it becomes tangent with the curve, the tangent point is maximum
>permeability. What they've done is throw the book out the window over cost
>in my opinion. If they would have designed it to operate normally, a mans
>power bill would be less too!
>>
>>Best,
>>
>>Will
>>
>>
>>*********** REPLY SEPARATOR  ***********
>>
>>On 3/14/06 at 8:35 PM wc6w@juno.com wrote:
>>
>>  
>>
>>>Hi Will,
>>> Not certain but, I believe 1KW.  It had a 1uF cap which is typical for
>>>that rating.  
>>>
>>> I didn't see a model number anywhere on the frame which was returned to
>>>the "alley" after the autopsy; Then, claimed by the Morlocks.
>>>
>>>73 & Good afternoon,
>>> Marv WC6W 
>>>
>>>
>>>-- "Will Matney" <craxd1@verizon.net> wrote:
>>>Marv,
>>>
>>>20 kilogauss is even over the maximum flux density of Hipersil or M-6
>>>which is 17 and recommends 15. M-2, the best is still 17 kg. I'd say that
>>>transformer is running into stauration under full load, and runs hot as a
>>>firecracker. In microwave ovens, even on high power, the tube is on for
>>>maybe a minute, than off so long, and then on again. The lower powers,
>>>this delay is even slower. I've noticed this while mine has been heating
>a
>>>meal, listening to it kick on and off over the fan noise. Since they're
>>>pulsing the power, they're giving the transformer time to cool down a
>>>little with help from the fan. A 1-3/8 x 2-3/8 core is only 3-1/4 square
>>>inches and is way to small for 1 KVA, maybe 500 watts at the most. What
>>>size of mocrowave was this in watts?
>>>
>>>Best,
>>>
>>>Will
>>>
>>>*********** REPLY SEPARATOR  ***********
>>>
>>>On 3/13/06 at 6:32 PM wc6w@juno.com wrote:
>>>
>>>    
>>>
>>>>Hi Will,
>>>> No holes in the lams except the one for the secondary termination
>rivet.
>>>>
>>>> The numbers are worse than you imagined.
>>>>
>>>> The core cross section is 3.5cm x 6 cm.
>>>>
>>>> The primary is wound with (approx.) 103 turns #14;  .33 ohms DCR, 34
>mHy
>>>>inductance.  Even with the mag. shunts removed, it takes quite a bit of
>>>>idle current.
>>>>
>>>> The secondary is wound with #27;  95 ohms DCR.
>>>>
>>>> The above numbers figure out to about 40 Watts coppper loss, and over
>>>>20K gauss in the core which is likely another 40 Watts loss at 1KW. 
>Eeek!
>>>>
>>>> Inspires a new meaning for ICAS:  Inappropriate Consumer Appliance
>>>>Service.
>>>>
>>>> I think if I was going to rewind one for something I'd add at least 20
>>>>turns to the primary and only run the thing at 750 watts or so to stay
>>>>within "amateur" ICAS.
>>>>
>>>>73 & Good morning,
>>>> Marv WC6W
>>>>
>>>>-- "Will Matney" <craxd1@verizon.net> wrote:
>>>>Marv,
>>>>
>>>>Well, they're getting cheaper, no screws now! Does the lams still have
>the
>>>>screw holes or are they solid? A 1/8" fillet weld wouldnt be too hard to
>>>>cut out. The problem with welds here is causing eddy currents that are
>>>>higher than normal thus running the losses up.  At one tune per volt and
>>>>about 12 kilogauss, it would use about a 5 square inch core and be rated
>>>>at about 1KVA or just under. I'd say though they're running it higher
>than
>>>>12 kilogauss, maybe 15-16. The easiest way to tell the turns per volt is
>>>>if there is any room between the coil and the cores outside legs, snake
>in
>>>>some wire, and do a 10 turn winding on the outside of the coil. Any size
>>>>small wire will do. Then, power up the primary and read the voltage of
>the
>>>>10 turn coil. Take that reading and use it to figure the turns per volt
>>>>with the line voltage. I use 10 turns so it's easier to figure it math
>>>>wise. At least on this one, the secondary connection to the core was
>>>>easily cut, some aren't. The shunt can be 
>>>>driven out with a hammer and a block of wood or a punch. The shunt was
>>>>used as a current limiter type of arrangement if I recall, or something
>to
>>>>that effect. On a power transformer for an amp, it would not be needed
>or
>>>>wanted. It's a shame how they've cheapend everything to cut
>manufacturing
>>>>costs using welding on a core.
>>>>
>>>>Best,
>>>>
>>>>Will
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>*********** REPLY SEPARATOR  ***********
>>>>
>>>>On 3/13/06 at 12:50 AM wc6w@juno.com wrote:
>>>>
>>>>      
>>>>
>>>>>Hi Will,
>>>>>  This one has four 1/8" wide welds down the opposing sides.  And yes,
>>>>>        
>>>>>
>>>it
>>>    
>>>
>>>>>has the shunts but, they are encased in transformer paper so, I'd guess
>>>>>that they could be easily driven out without disturbing anything else. 
>>>>>        
>>>>>
>>>No
>>>    
>>>
>>>>>screws what so ever.  The lams are even welded to the mounting frame in
>>>>>four spots.  The "cold" end of the secondary was soldered to a lug
>which
>>>>>was riveted to the lams -- I necessarily disconnected that wire for the
>>>>>hi-pot check.
>>>>>
>>>>>  It looks like it's wound at about 1 turn per volt.   As the core
>>>>>wouldn't practically dissassmble, the only easy rewind would be for a
>>>>>filament transformer.  The secondary could be sliced out by a careful
>guy
>>>>>and rewound with a bundle of large wires in parallel making a KW
>filament
>>>>>transformer... for say a 4CX5000/10000?   Or twenty 813's?  :-)
>>>>>
>>>>>73 & Good afternoon,

>>>>> Marv WC6W
>>>>>
>>>>>**********************************
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>-- "Will Matney" <craxd1@verizon.net> wrote:
>>>>>Marv,
>>>>>
>>>>>Did you check to see if one of the windings was connected to the core,
>>>>>        
>>>>>
>>>and
>>>    
>>>
>>>>>if the core had a shunt in it? That is what most have that I've seen.
>>>>>Another thing that really ticks me about their manufacture, and a few
>>>>>other transformers too, is they weld the lams together. They put a weld
>>>>>right down one side of the lams, front to back, one bead about 1/4"
>wide.
>>>>>That makes them a bit*h to use for a rewind. A person with a mill, or
>be
>>>>>good with a disc grinder can remove the weld. Also, the shunt needs to
>be
>>>>>driven out with a hammer. This is really good though as it gives you
>more
>>>>>vertical window area for a new coil. What gets me though is why weld
>them
>>>>>and still use screws to hold the lams together?
>>>>>
>>>>>Best,
>>>>>
>>>>>Will
>>>>>
>>>>>*********** REPLY SEPARATOR  ***********
>>>>>
>>>>>On 3/12/06 at 11:57 PM wc6w@juno.com wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>        
>>>>>
>>>>>>QST
>>>>>> Yesterday, I acquired a 2004 vintage Sharp microwave oven, from the
>>>>>>"alley exchange", which was light (weightwise) enough that I thought
>it
>>>>>>might contain a switching power supply.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Upon examining the unit, I found that the incredible lightness was
>due
>>>>>>to its construction with frame metal of soda can thickness, and that
>it
>>>>>>contained a conventional transformer manufactured by one Digital Power
>>>>>>Communications Co, Ltd.  
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There was an article in QEX about 10 years ago that discussed the use
>>>>>>          
>>>>>>
>>>>of
>>>>      
>>>>
>>>>>>these microwave oven transformers in plate power supplies.  It advised
>>>>>>against using them in a conventional full wave bridge but, rather used
>>>>>>them in an unorthodox half wave connection.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Examining the transformer at hand, it appeared that the insulation
>was
>>>>>>uniform over the full length of the secondary.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I disconnected the "low side" secondary lead from the frame and
>>>>>>hi-potted the secondary (also the primary just for science...) up to
>>>>>>          
>>>>>>
>>>4KV,
>>>    
>>>
>>>>>>referenced to the frame, with zero leakage.  
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This suggests that one of these transformers might be employed in a
>>>>>>"normal" connection for a low voltage (2500V) KW input amplifier.  
>Or a
>>>>>>pair of identical units in parallel for a 2KW input amp.   
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Caution, this suggestion MAY NOT hold true for other makers of this
>>>>>>style of transformer.  
>>>>>>
>>>>>>73 & Good afternoon,
>>>>>>  Marv WC6W  
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>P.S. -- The magnets from the magnetron assembly make great
>refrigerator
>>>>>>magnets!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>*
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>________________________________________________________________________
>>>>>>Try Juno Platinum for Free! Then, only $9.95/month!
>>>>>>Unlimited Internet Access with 1GB of Email Storage.
>>>>>>Visit http://www.juno.com/value to sign up today!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>>>Amps mailing list
>>>>>>Amps@contesting.com
>>>>>>http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps
>>>>>>          
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>>Amps mailing list
>>>>>Amps@contesting.com
>>>>>http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>________________________________________________________________________
>>>>>Try Juno Platinum for Free! Then, only $9.95/month!
>>>>>Unlimited Internet Access with 1GB of Email Storage.
>>>>>Visit http://www.juno.com/value to sign up today!
>>>>>        
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>Amps mailing list
>>>>Amps@contesting.com
>>>>http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>________________________________________________________________________
>>>>Try Juno Platinum for Free! Then, only $9.95/month!
>>>>Unlimited Internet Access with 1GB of Email Storage.
>>>>Visit http://www.juno.com/value to sign up today!
>>>>      
>>>>
>>>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>Amps mailing list
>>>Amps@contesting.com
>>>http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>________________________________________________________________________
>>>Try Juno Platinum for Free! Then, only $9.95/month!
>>>Unlimited Internet Access with 1GB of Email Storage.
>>>Visit http://www.juno.com/value to sign up today!
>>>    
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>Amps mailing list
>>Amps@contesting.com
>>http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps
>>
>>  
>>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Amps mailing list
>Amps@contesting.com
>http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps



_______________________________________________
Amps mailing list
Amps@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>