[HN Gopher] Practical Transformer Winding (2010)
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Practical Transformer Winding (2010)
        
       Author : bearbin
       Score  : 108 points
       Date   : 2021-12-25 17:50 UTC (2 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (ludens.cl)
 (TXT) w3m dump (ludens.cl)
        
       | Animats wrote:
       | That's so retro. Useful if repairing boat-anchor equipment from
       | the 1950s.
       | 
       | Here's a more modern video on winding toroids by hand.[1]
       | 
       | [1] https://youtu.be/sDIWNHOoNh8
        
       | londons_explore wrote:
       | Nearly all usecases for a power transformer are now better served
       | by a switched mode power supply.
       | 
       | They tend to be much smaller, lighter, more efficient, cooler and
       | cheaper. They also have features like adjustable output voltage,
       | current limits, and overheat protection. Some can input and
       | output AC or DC, at a configurable frequency and sometimes
       | waveform. Some offer the same galvanic isolation that a
       | transformer offers too.
       | 
       | The core of a switched mode supply usually _is_ a transformer, or
       | at least an inductor, but the key difference is that it operates
       | at far higher frequencies than classic uses of transformers,
       | which allows them to be far far smaller, and therefore cheaper
       | for the same power output.
        
         | snowwindwaves wrote:
         | Are you saying large Transformers 1 mva, 10 mva, 100 mva, 500
         | mva are obsolete and should be replaced by switched mode power
         | supplies? What mva is the threshold?
        
           | londons_explore wrote:
           | For new installation, yes, for any size a switched mode
           | supply will usually be better in all dimensions. For the
           | largest sizes, you can't buy them off the shelf, and there
           | design costs may dominate. But after the thing is designed,
           | in component costs, switched mode will win. Everything scales
           | linearly with kVA, so there is no economics crossover point
           | for the fundamental materials.
           | 
           | Eventually it will be worth switching out old transformers -
           | they contain a massive amount of valuable copper and quite
           | valuable steel, and their lower efficiency means every year
           | they remain in service they are wasting $$$'s of electricity.
           | 
           | Transformers in cities can often be replaced with much
           | smaller switched mode units underground, allowing the
           | building housing the old transformer to be rebuilt as luxury
           | flats to make the project much more profitable too!
        
             | snowwindwaves wrote:
             | Large power transformers have efficiencies in the 98-99.75%
             | range.
             | 
             | I don't doubt switch mode could be smaller and cheaper up
             | to some size, but I am struggling to see transformers
             | larger than about 5 mva being replaced with power
             | electronics.
             | 
             | Solar farms etc have inverters in modules I believe 500 kva
             | each - and of course the power electronics are necessary
             | there, there is no substitute.
             | 
             | I have a 20 MVA transformer that is nearly at end of life
             | and would be open to cheaper replacements.
        
         | wglb wrote:
         | Those properties are all positive, but there is one glaring
         | negative: rf radiation. I know some ham radio station builders
         | that will not allow any switched mode power supply on their
         | property, including wall warts and smartphone chargers.
        
           | Animats wrote:
           | That's a problem, especially with low-end power supplies.
           | 
           | I designed a switching power supply a few years ago for a
           | specialist application - driving 1930s Teletype machines
           | which need 120VDC 60mA.[1] A switching power supply is a
           | spike generator. Here's the schematic.[2]
           | 
           | This is reasonably RF-quiet. The transformer of the switching
           | power supply is a toroid in a metal can, so you don't get too
           | much RF from the transformer itself. But that's not where it
           | usually comes from. The important thing is to keep spikes out
           | of both the input and output wiring. That's dealt with by
           | using LTSpice to simulate the circuit, and adding small
           | capacitors and inductors until the spikes have disappeared in
           | both voltage and current. At the output end, note the snubber
           | C7, R1, D10, and D11, to soak up any spikes from the
           | inductive load, and L2, to soak up output side current
           | spikes. There's L1 and C12, to soak up kickback from the
           | switched input side of the power supply. Plus C10 at the
           | power input, which is from a USB port. They're all tiny
           | surface mount components. The inductors are ferrite beads in
           | surface mount form.
           | 
           | So there are eight extra components, just to prevent unwanted
           | RF generation. The LTSpice simulation shows that they're all
           | needed. The simulation was used to choose the values.
           | 
           | This is why good switching power supplies have more parts
           | than bad ones. You see that in teardown videos.
           | 
           | [1] https://github.com/John-Nagle/ttyloopdriver
           | 
           | [2] https://github.com/John-
           | Nagle/ttyloopdriver/blob/master/boar...
        
       | aivisol wrote:
       | Winding your own transformer was one of those things which amazed
       | me as a teenager: you do a simple math by calculating winding
       | ratio and the voltage is changed at the secondary by magic...
        
       | myself248 wrote:
       | Yesss! This is what I was hoping to find last time I clicked on
       | an HN headline "transformers from scratch", which turned out to
       | be about machine learning:
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29280909
       | 
       | This is great. It gets into the flux density and iron loss
       | calculations that affect the physical size of a transformer core,
       | choosing the wire, and then exquisite detail of actually winding
       | and finishing the thing.
       | 
       | I need to spend a bunch more time reading this site.
        
         | belter wrote:
         | The Transformer Winding community knows that you won't let us
         | down.
        
         | scoot wrote:
         | A transformer and coil design guide from the same author:
         | https://ludens.cl/Electron/Magnet.html
        
         | formerly_proven wrote:
         | I find this trend of naming software ideas after common words
         | really quite annoying (transformers, lenses, optics etc.)...
        
           | myself248 wrote:
           | Or using the word "bandwidth" to refer to "capacity" or "data
           | throughput" rather than "the width of the band that the
           | signal occupies". Arrrrgh. Yes the two things are the same
           | for certain naive modulations, but the whole point of using a
           | better modulation is that you get more throughput for the
           | same bandwidth. Understanding this requires first unlearning
           | the abuse of the term, and that's hard work for a lot of
           | engineers who really need to understand this.
        
             | jbay808 wrote:
             | Shannon's channel theorem states that the information
             | capacity of a channel is directly related to the bandwidth
             | and the signal-to-noise ratio, even if you use the best
             | possible modulation scheme:
             | 
             | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shannon%E2%80%93Hartley_the
             | o...
        
               | p1esk wrote:
               | He's talking about throughput, not the information
               | capacity of the channel.
        
               | jbay808 wrote:
               | Can you explain the difference? They seem to me like
               | virtually the same concept, but you seem to see an
               | important distinction.
        
               | p1esk wrote:
               | Channel capacity is an ideal theoretical concept
               | establishing a maximum data transmission rate over a
               | channel with strong assumptions about the noise in that
               | channel. Throughput is what you actually get in the real
               | world, and it depends on many things, including a
               | modulation scheme, retransmission protocols, specific
               | noise models, etc.
        
           | analog31 wrote:
           | From what I've read, that's why physicists started giving
           | things whimsical names like Quark, Charm, Strangeness, etc.
           | The problem with using common words is that they always
           | suggest an analogy, the analogy is never perfect, and often
           | causes more confusion than understanding.
           | 
           | (Also, Murray Gell-Mann was a whimsical character to begin
           | with).
        
           | amelius wrote:
           | Or naming companies after physical units (e.g. Tesla).
        
             | codingdave wrote:
             | Or naming physical units after people (e.g. Tesla).
             | 
             | FWIW, Tesla the company was named after Tesla the person,
             | not the measurement.
        
               | dylan604 wrote:
               | Yeah, the comment you replied is almost troll-like
        
               | amelius wrote:
               | Why? Many professionals use the unit Tesla on a daily
               | basis. It's like someone claiming the word Pixel for
               | their company or product which I'm sure already happened.
        
               | formerly_proven wrote:
               | https://store.google.com/category/phones
        
           | bob1029 wrote:
           | I agree, but at the same time "Sequence-to-sequence model
           | utilizing self-attention" doesn't roll off the tongue as well
           | and would otherwise make the thing more difficult to talk
           | about.
        
         | priansh wrote:
         | Touche, I opened this hoping to find a new method to train
         | Transformers and got the opposite
        
       | GnarfGnarf wrote:
       | I ran a high school science lab in Bolivia in 1968. It was
       | cheaper to get a local guy to _hand-wind_ forty centre-tap
       | transformers, than to order them from Germany or the U.S.
        
       | hwillis wrote:
       | Ludens is absolutely legendary. This is part of his micro
       | hydroelectric dam[1], which he uses to power his house, which he
       | of course built himself.
       | 
       | Far different, but if you enjoyed this you may also enjoy another
       | classic (which does not have explanation), Claude Paillard making
       | a vacuum tube from glass and metal:
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EzyXMEpq4qw
       | 
       | [1]: https://ludens.cl/paradise/turbine/turbine.html
        
         | willis936 wrote:
         | Incredible. I had a dream when I was a child of a house powered
         | by small-scale hydroelectric, but learning the reality of water
         | rights made me abandon it. It is truly inspiring to see someone
         | live this dream.
        
       | bserge wrote:
        
       | VBprogrammer wrote:
       | There are interesting people on thebackshed.net who have been
       | building whole house inverters, initially repurposing some
       | Chinese inverter chip but more recently an arduino for the
       | brains. Unfortunately a lot of the info is spread across many
       | different build threads but a big part of it is about rewinding
       | toroidal transformers.
        
       | Isamu wrote:
       | > Transformer steel is not all born alike. Manufacturers will
       | provide data sheets about their products (often on their web
       | sites), where you can see what they offer. There are usually many
       | grades, with vastly different loss characteristics. At a given
       | flux density and frequency, a good material might have ten times
       | less loss than a cheap material! So it pays to look, investigate,
       | and decide intelligently what to buy. Thinner sheets normally
       | have lower loss, and the rest of the secret lies in the exact
       | alloy.
       | 
       | Okay this is what I come to HN for, thanks everybody!
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-12-27 23:01 UTC)