Inrush current in a transformer chain

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the inrush current behavior in a transformer chain, specifically regarding XFMR1 and XFMR2 with open secondaries. It highlights that the inrush current may be influenced by factors such as leakage inductance, load circuitry, transformer core saturation, and winding capacitance. The consensus is that a more detailed model is necessary to accurately predict inrush current, as it can vary based on the initial magnetic state of the core. If the core is demagnetized when de-energized, no inrush current is expected in the secondary circuit. Overall, the complexity of the system makes precise predictions challenging.
Guineafowl
Messages
866
Reaction score
404
TL;DR Summary
How does connecting two transformers in a chain affect the inrush current (at switch-on), as opposed to one transformer on its own?
1707921595020.png


This is the proposal, except the two middle voltages are 110V, not 12V.

Say the max switch-on inrush current of XFMR1 is xA with the secondary open, would the value change significantly in the above arrangement, with the secondary of XFMR2 open?
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
You have twice the leakage inductance, so the inrush may be a little lower.
 
berkeman said:
You have twice the leakage inductance, so the inrush may be a little lower.
Thanks.
 
Hard to answer without knowing what causes the inrush current.

- If it's from the load circuitry, the I'm with @berkeman, more series impedance buffer means less inrush magnitude, but longer duration (probably).

- If it's from the transformer core saturation because of residual magnetization, then it's just not predictable, at least to me. But, the same or maybe more.

- If it's from winding capacitance then you get an addition of some sort. Complicated by turns ratio and leakage inductance.

The short answer is that you need a much more detailed model, which is pretty difficult. As you drew it, I'd say there's no inrush surge in any case.
 
Last edited:
If the magnetic core was in demagnetized position when it was de-energized

then up to 100 A/m magnetic field the flux density is about 0 so E1=0 and E2=0 and I2=0 since the second loop E=0.

So, no inrush current is expected in the secondary.

0=U-(E+Z*Iinrush)

U is the supply voltage, E it is the electromotive force in the primary or secondary windings and Z is the short-circuit impedance.

E=Φ*ω Φ=Bfe*A [A= magnetic core cross section area].The current will rise in time from 0 to Iinrush .

If the magnetic core was in demagnetized position when it was de-energized then up to 100 A/m magnetic field the flux density is about 0 then Φ=0 so E1=0 and so E2. So, no inrush current is expected in the secondary.

Iinrush=(U-E)/Z [ if E1=0 then Iinrush=U/Z] ; Z=R+jXe Xe=leakage magnetic flux reactance Xe=Le*ω it is considered independent of main flux level.
 

Attachments

  • Magnetic flux density vs Field.jpg
    Magnetic flux density vs Field.jpg
    37.2 KB · Views: 70
  • Hard and soft magnet magnetic flux density.jpg
    Hard and soft magnet magnetic flux density.jpg
    40.5 KB · Views: 65
Hey guys. I have a question related to electricity and alternating current. Say an alien fictional society developed electricity, and settled on a standard like 73V AC current at 46 Hz. How would appliances be designed, and what impact would the lower frequency and voltage have on transformers, wiring, TVs, computers, LEDs, motors, and heating, assuming the laws of physics and technology are the same as on Earth?
While I was rolling out a shielded cable, a though came to my mind - what happens to the current flow in the cable if there came a short between the wire and the shield in both ends of the cable? For simplicity, lets assume a 1-wire copper wire wrapped in an aluminum shield. The wire and the shield has the same cross section area. There are insulating material between them, and in both ends there is a short between them. My first thought, the total resistance of the cable would be reduced...
I used to be an HVAC technician. One time I had a service call in which there was no power to the thermostat. The thermostat did not have power because the fuse in the air handler was blown. The fuse in the air handler was blown because there was a low voltage short. The rubber coating on one of the thermostat wires was chewed off by a rodent. The exposed metal in the thermostat wire was touching the metal cabinet of the air handler. This was a low voltage short. This low voltage...
Back
Top