Transformer Mathmatical Modelling

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on mathematical modeling of transformers, specifically using MATLAB for analysis. Key equations for modeling include Vp-ip*Rp-Lp*(dip/dt)-Rc*ic = 0 and Vp-Lm*(dim/dt) = 0. Participants debate the combination of primary and secondary reactances (Xp and Xs), with some asserting they can be combined under certain load conditions while others disagree. The conversation also touches on simplifying assumptions for no-load and full-load conditions, noting that certain parameters can be ignored in these scenarios. The goal is to derive the secondary voltage and flux relationships, with a specific interest in the equation Vs=(Ns/Np)*Ep.
brilliant-12
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
750px-Transformer_equivalent_circuit.svg.png


I would like to do the mathmatical modelling then apply it in matlab. This is my trailier.

Vp-ip*Rp-Lp*(dip/dt)-Rc*ic = 0 ----- 1
Vp-Lm*(dim/dt) = 0 ------2
i need the modelling of the secondary voltage to the primary and the flux

Vs= ?
flux= ?

I did apply it in MATLAB but didn't work.
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
up ....
 
I know nothing about mathlab. But from a transformer analysis point of view:
Xp and Xs should be combined.
Do modeling at no load and also at full load.
At no load Xp, Xs, Rp and Rs can be ignored.
At full load Rc and Xm can be ignored

Above simplification can be used for normal transformers. There are some extremely rare exceptions where the preceding is not true.

Some transformers engineers say Xp and Xs can not be combined. I am in the group that say they can be combined.
 
brilliant-12 said:
I would like to do the mathmatical modelling then apply it in matlab. This is my trailier.

Vp-ip*Rp-Lp*(dip/dt)-Rc*ic = 0 ----- 1
okay
Vp-Lm*(dim/dt) = 0 ------2
That can't possibly be right.
i need the modelling of the secondary voltage to the primary and the flux
Vs= ?
Vs=(Ns/Np)*Ep
 
Thread 'Weird near-field phenomenon I get in my EM simulation'
I recently made a basic simulation of wire antennas and I am not sure if the near field in my simulation is modeled correctly. One of the things that worry me is the fact that sometimes I see in my simulation "movements" in the near field that seems to be faster than the speed of wave propagation I defined (the speed of light in the simulation). Specifically I see "nodes" of low amplitude in the E field that are quickly "emitted" from the antenna and then slow down as they approach the far...
Hello dear reader, a brief introduction: Some 4 years ago someone started developing health related issues, apparently due to exposure to RF & ELF related frequencies and/or fields (Magnetic). This is currently becoming known as EHS. (Electromagnetic hypersensitivity is a claimed sensitivity to electromagnetic fields, to which adverse symptoms are attributed.) She experiences a deep burning sensation throughout her entire body, leaving her in pain and exhausted after a pulse has occurred...
Back
Top