nst.john
- 163
- 1
If I am making my own inductor following the equation:
Optimizing Inductor Design: Factors to Consider
- Thread starter nst.john
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Inductors
Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
10 replies · 2K views
nst.john
- 163
- 1
Sorry didn't finish, following the equation L=μN2A/l where L is inductance, μ is the magnetic permeability, N is the number of turns and l is the length, and I have a piece of aluminum as my core with a μ=1.256665x10-6, if the aluminum core is hollow, meaning a conduit pipe, when calculating the inductance would μ still be just the value for aluminum or would it be a combination of aluminum and air since the pipe is hollow. Please answer quickly and thank you for your help in advance!
Jeff Rosenbury
- 746
- 145
Aren't they the same thing?
According to the chart on Wikipedia they have the same value out to 5 decimal points. I doubt a handmade inductor will be accurate that far out. I think you will be lucky to be within 5%.
You should be able to treat an aluminum core as an air core for small currents. (I don't know if it saturates like iron, but I doubt it.) You will be adding core losses though.
According to the chart on Wikipedia they have the same value out to 5 decimal points. I doubt a handmade inductor will be accurate that far out. I think you will be lucky to be within 5%.
You should be able to treat an aluminum core as an air core for small currents. (I don't know if it saturates like iron, but I doubt it.) You will be adding core losses though.
nst.john
- 163
- 1
Alrighty thanks a lot! That should be a lot of help.
Gold Member
- 3,080
- 1,435
For AC, the aluminium will have a current induced into it which have its own magnetic field opposing the main one. This will reduce the inductance slightly.nst.john said:
nst.john
- 163
- 1
How much is slightly?
Gold Member
- 3,080
- 1,435
Not sure how to calculate it. Why don't you use a plastic or cardboard former? These materials all have a relative permeability of 1.nst.john said:
Last edited by a moderator:
Jeff Rosenbury
- 746
- 145
Me either. 
It depends on the geometry of the aluminum tube/bar. Nominally the tube will cut through the magnetic flux just like a loop of wire. It will develop a counter flux just like a loop of wire. So it should subtract an amount about equal to a one loop inductor from your multi-loop inductor (but of the length of the tube). Of course that assumes the geometry supports the tube as a full loop cutting through all the flux, which it won't. Still in a typical application it should get the lion's share, so I'd figure it for one loop.
Are you aware of induction furnaces? It is remotely possible you might be unknowingly building one. They are actually finicky, so it's unlikely, but core losses might be a problem at radio frequencies (~100,000 Hz.).
If you are concerned about the actual value, you can measure it when you are done. This is not trivial. The easiest way I know is to build a tank circuit with a known capacitance and find the resonant frequency. Then calculate back.
Almost all non-conductive materials are the same permeability as air. Wouldn't that be easier?
It depends on the geometry of the aluminum tube/bar. Nominally the tube will cut through the magnetic flux just like a loop of wire. It will develop a counter flux just like a loop of wire. So it should subtract an amount about equal to a one loop inductor from your multi-loop inductor (but of the length of the tube). Of course that assumes the geometry supports the tube as a full loop cutting through all the flux, which it won't. Still in a typical application it should get the lion's share, so I'd figure it for one loop.
Are you aware of induction furnaces? It is remotely possible you might be unknowingly building one. They are actually finicky, so it's unlikely, but core losses might be a problem at radio frequencies (~100,000 Hz.).
If you are concerned about the actual value, you can measure it when you are done. This is not trivial. The easiest way I know is to build a tank circuit with a known capacitance and find the resonant frequency. Then calculate back.
Almost all non-conductive materials are the same permeability as air. Wouldn't that be easier?
nst.john
- 163
- 1
True. I'll try that. I'm applying for the Google science fair and need it for tomorrow so this should be good. And my frequency needed is 40kHz so would that still be a problem?
Jeff Rosenbury
- 746
- 145
Yes, 40kHz will buy you some hefty core losses. How much of a problem that is will depend on your application. If it plugs into the wall and doesn't get hot you should be fine. If it is human powered... Sweat a little more.nst.john said:
If it's just a science project, don't worry. The worst that can happen is the entire thing burns and you win the pyrotechnic award.
No one will care if it uses 1/2% more power than it should.
stedwards
- 416
- 46
L=μN2A/l is not the correct equation to use, or at least not as you might think it is.
"l" is the effective magnetic path length. It includes the return path outside the cylinder. Also the permeability over the return path is the permeability of air--which is about the same as the vacuum permeability.
There's an additional problem with the formula. With a low permeability core, not all the flux passing through one loop will pass through the other N-1 turns, so the N^2 term is too large.
I would look for an online inductance calculator, or table of various inductor geometries.
Additionally, i don't think you want to use an aluminum mandrel, or any conductive mandrel. It's effectively a short circuit, transformer secondary winding of one turn. This reduces the Q.
"l" is the effective magnetic path length. It includes the return path outside the cylinder. Also the permeability over the return path is the permeability of air--which is about the same as the vacuum permeability.
There's an additional problem with the formula. With a low permeability core, not all the flux passing through one loop will pass through the other N-1 turns, so the N^2 term is too large.
I would look for an online inductance calculator, or table of various inductor geometries.
Additionally, i don't think you want to use an aluminum mandrel, or any conductive mandrel. It's effectively a short circuit, transformer secondary winding of one turn. This reduces the Q.
Last edited: