# Characterizing a CT via a major B-H loop?

• MRKN
In summary: I'm not in any rush, and I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one that finds your posts informative.In summary, the conversation discusses different methods of modeling non-linear cores and the challenges of accurately characterizing a CT's response at very high fault currents. The use of a constant voltage source and an integrator technique is suggested, but it is noted that this method may not accurately reflect the behavior of the core as it approaches saturation. The idea of using a triangle current waveform is proposed as a potential solution. The conversation also mentions the use of an excitation curve to determine the maximum voltage a transformer can handle before it saturates. Overall, the conversation highlights the complexity of analyzing non-linear cores and the importance of understanding their behavior
MRKN
I contend this cannot be done!

A popular method of modeling non-linear cores is to obtain the values for remnant flux density, saturation flux density, and the coercive force at some major hysteresis curve, and to then mathematically extrapolate a curve (a few other parameters are also needed to interface with the electrical quantities of a circuit - Ac, lm, lg, N). See "Nonlinear Transformer Model for Circuit Simulation" by Chan for the model used in LTSpice. So I figure this may be a good approach towards characterizing a CT- and I can use it in LTSpice!

The problem with simply hooking a constant voltage source, limiting the current by some resistance, and proceeding as shown http://www.cliftonlaboratories.com/type_43_ferrite_b-h_curve.htm" is that the value measured for the coercive force is dependent on the primary current- i.e. once we are in saturation, and a complete B-H loop is defined, current can be further increased, and Hc further increases! (Bs, Br remain constant). I have verified this in lab with a constant voltage source, limited by some large power resistors. I can source anywhere from 0-8A at 60Hz. I use a current probe amplifier (X input) and a passive 300k/2uF integrator, with the output of the capacitor on a 1x scope probe (Y input).

I believe the error lies in CTs being defined via a constant current, rather than a constant voltage source. I suspect it is for this reason that CTs are not characterized by B-H curves, but rather by excitation curves. Unfortunately, my ability to reason falls short here, and I was hoping for a clarified explanation, or any insight into where my reasoning so far has been wrong.

FYI: I am attempting to characterize a CTs response for very high fault currents (say, 5,000x that which would saturate it, when we are approaching the short time thermal limit- what happens there?), and would like an alternate model to the http://www2.selinc.com/techpprs/6038.pdf" . I have extended the idea presented there for calculating the magnitudes and durations of what trends towards secondary voltage impulses at high primary levels, but would prefer an alternative approach for examination.

Thanks a bunch.

Last edited by a moderator:
MRKN said:
The problem with simply hooking a constant voltage source, limiting the current by some resistance, and proceeding as shown http://www.cliftonlaboratories.com/type_43_ferrite_b-h_curve.htm" is that the value measured for the coercive force is dependent on the primary current- i.e. once we are in saturation, and a complete B-H loop is defined, current can be further increased, and Hc further increases!

Doesn't that seem logical ?
If you push the core further into saturation, it gets harder to pull it back out.

MRKN said:
I use a current probe amplifier (X input) and a passive 300k/2uF integrator, with the output of the capacitor on a 1x scope probe (Y input).
Great technique I've used it myself. I used a megohm and 1 μf,
did you see much 60hz noise on your flux signal ?

MRKN said:
"Nonlinear Transformer Model for Circuit Simulation" by Chan
Just found it. It's a handful to digest at one sitting...
will try to figure out what he's saying.
I'm visiting family in Oklahoma so it may be a couple days

Ferromagnetic phenomena don't lend themselves to linear analysis because, well, they're nonlinear.
Best book i know of is Bozorth's "Ferromagnetism".
If you have the ability to drive a triangle wave current through the primary winding, instead of your sine wave,
you'll see that flux doesn't follow current because of the time lapse necessary for magnetization to proceed from the periphery to the center of the core.
Simplest explanation for that is eddy currents in the core - your primary isn't the only current present - but old timer gurus at Westinghouse assured me there are other phenomena at play too.
EDIT I may be all wet on that statement - Ferrite should be way faster than ordinary steel

MRKN said:
I believe the error lies in CTs being defined via a constant current, rather than a constant voltage source. I suspect it is for this reason that CTs are not characterized by B-H curves, but rather by excitation curves.
The excitation curve to me only conveys the maximum voltage i can expect the transformer to impress across its burden with any semblance of believability.
Once you get past the knee of the excitation curve you no longer have a transformer, you have a saturable reactor with a secondary winding that's reporting what is the approximate derivative of its very nonlinear flux.
They're constant current only within limits of that excitation curve.

MRKN said:
FYI: I am attempting to characterize a CTs response for very high fault currents (say, 5,000x that which would saturate it, when we are approaching the short time thermal limit- what happens there?),
I don't think you can do that measurement with an iron core.
A Rogowski coil should do it, though.

Seriously - try a triangle current waveform , and at various frequencies.
The triangle current gives constant dΦ/dt so should make a square wave voltage
Deviation from that square wave will tell you how well behaved is your ferrite core at each frequency
I'd be interested to see your waveforms as it begins to saturate.

Sorry , i don't have my head all the way around your subject yet
but it is certainly interesting !

@Dr.D is interested in magnetics too, and i owe him a look st some related papers. His math is way better than mine.
Hopefully i can get some reading in tonight.

old jim

Spinnor
A 400 series tainless steel shaft approx 3 inch diameter
excited with a 3 hz triangle wave current(top)
note rounded corners of voltage wave(bottom)
your 43 should be MUCH faster

Thanks, Fair-Rite corp !

Spinnor
jim hardy said:
I'm visiting family in Oklahoma so it may be a couple days
Take your time Jim. This is a spring cleaning necro post.

Spinnor and jim hardy
MRKN said:
I contend this cannot be done!

i tend to agree with you.
Chan did it for a plain vanilla transistorized mutivibrator , his fig 7, which has been around since at least the 1950's.
But you're pushing your core a LOT harder than does that circuit.
MRKN said:
FYI: I am attempting to characterize a CTs response for very high fault currents (say, 5,000x that which would saturate it, when we are approaching the short time thermal limit- what happens there?),

and i doubt Chan's model will hold up - there's not enough of a memory term in it.
Currents of the magnitude you are considering will impart a "permanent" magnetization to CT's
and there's a niche market in power industry for devices to 'demagnetize'" them.

see http://www.spinlabinc.com/Demag Flyer.pdf
and https://www.researchgate.net/publication/276339546_Demagnetization_of_Current_Transformers_Using_PWM_Burden

for starters.

I hope you (or somebody else interested ) find this and post 'scope traces of flux and current for that ferrite core.

old jim

Spinnor

## 1. What is a major B-H loop?

A major B-H loop is a graphical representation of the relationship between magnetic flux density (B) and magnetic field strength (H) in a material. It is typically used to characterize the magnetic properties of a material, such as in a CT (computed tomography) scan.

## 2. How is a major B-H loop measured?

A major B-H loop is measured by applying a varying magnetic field to a material and measuring the resulting magnetic flux density. This is typically done using specialized equipment, such as a hysteresis loop tracer.

## 3. What information can be obtained from a major B-H loop?

A major B-H loop can provide information about a material's magnetic properties, such as its magnetic permeability, coercivity, and remanence. This information is useful in understanding how the material will respond to a magnetic field.

## 4. How is a major B-H loop used in CT scans?

In CT scans, a major B-H loop is used to characterize the magnetic properties of the material used in the CT scanner's X-ray tube. This helps to ensure that the magnetic field used in the scan is consistent and accurate, resulting in high-quality images.

## 5. Can a major B-H loop change over time?

Yes, a major B-H loop can change over time due to factors such as aging, temperature, and mechanical stress. This is why it is important to regularly calibrate and monitor the magnetic properties of materials used in CT scanners to ensure accurate results.

Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
64
Views
5K
Replies
24
Views
5K
Replies
152
Views
6K
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
96
Views
10K
Replies
26
Views
8K
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
13
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
3K