Total reluctance in a magnetic core

  • Thread starter Thread starter kevinb
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Core Magnetic
AI Thread Summary
Total reluctance in a magnetic circuit can differ from the sum of individual reluctances when areas are arranged in parallel or series. The reluctance formula R=l/(μA) helps determine the reluctance for each section, but understanding the configuration is crucial for accurate calculations. In the discussed example, the left and right legs of the circuit are in parallel, while the center section is in series with them. It's essential to consider the air gap's reluctance in the overall calculation. Further reading of the provided resources can enhance comprehension of these principles.
kevinb
Messages
5
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


I am looking for a general explanation of when the total reluctance of a magnetic circuit is not equivalent to the sum of the reluctances if each area. In several examples the text has added 2 areas in parallel and then added the third area. I'm not 100% sure on when this is required.

Homework Equations



I use R=l/(μA) to determine the reluctance of each area, but don't know if/when reluctances need to be added in parallel.

The Attempt at a Solution



For example, if I have a shape like this:
0WZLM.jpg
where the shaded region is air and the rest (the white area) is iron, I calculated the reluctance for the left, middle, right and small air gap. However, is the total the simple addition of them or are the left and right "legs" in parallel?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
The center is in series with the two outer loops which are in parallel.

See page 11 of 35 in http://www.ece.msstate.edu/~donohoe/ece3183magnetic_circuits_and_transformers.pdf

or page 29 of 33 in http://www1.mmu.edu.my/~wslim/lecture_notes/Chapter4.pdf

It's a fairly standard magnetic circuit. One must treat the air gap as well.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thank you very much. Those two documents were perfect explanations for this particular circuit, but I'll read them further so I gain a better grasp of the general principles as well.
 
Thread 'Help with Time-Independent Perturbation Theory "Good" States Proof'
(Disclaimer: this is not a HW question. I am self-studying, and this felt like the type of question I've seen in this forum. If there is somewhere better for me to share this doubt, please let me know and I'll transfer it right away.) I am currently reviewing Chapter 7 of Introduction to QM by Griffiths. I have been stuck for an hour or so trying to understand the last paragraph of this proof (pls check the attached file). It claims that we can express Ψ_{γ}(0) as a linear combination of...
Back
Top