Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.electronics.design > #429774
| From | "Tim Williams" <tiwill@seventransistorlabs.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | sci.electronics.design |
| Subject | Re: More inductor talk, Proximity effect, self capacitance |
| Date | 2016-09-28 23:50 -0500 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <nsi6hu$5vc$1@dont-email.me> (permalink) |
| References | <nsh2tn$8cq$1@dont-email.me> <k8coub90opo91a0icbd4mo9ml2e4gg7n5v@4ax.com> <nshesd$mim$1@dont-email.me> |
"amdx" <nojunk@knology.net> wrote in message news:nshesd$mim$1@dont-email.me... > But note: the coils have near identical Q's and then the spaced coils Q > rises quickly, why didn't it just start out higher as it should have > less loss because of less proximity effect. That only shows up at higher > frequencies, why? Assuming they were wound with equal lengths of wire (give or take a modest margin), and wound for the same inductances, then at low frequency, DCR is equal and inductance is equal. At high frequencies, ACR rises for the close-spaced one, due to proximity effect, while the spaced one rises less. Tim -- Seven Transistor Labs, LLC Electrical Engineering Consultation and Contract Design Website: http://seventransistorlabs.com
Back to sci.electronics.design | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
More inductor talk, Proximity effect, self capacitance amdx <nojunk@knology.net> - 2016-09-28 13:42 -0500
Re: More inductor talk, Proximity effect, self capacitance boB <boB@theresnoplacelikehome.com> - 2016-09-28 14:08 -0700
Re: More inductor talk, Proximity effect, self capacitance amdx <nojunk@knology.net> - 2016-09-28 17:06 -0500
Re: More inductor talk, Proximity effect, self capacitance "Tim Williams" <tiwill@seventransistorlabs.com> - 2016-09-28 23:50 -0500
Re: More inductor talk, Proximity effect, self capacitance boB <boB@theresnoplacelikehome.com> - 2016-09-28 22:27 -0700
Re: More inductor talk, Proximity effect, self capacitance amdx <nojunk@knology.net> - 2016-10-03 15:46 -0500
Re: More inductor talk, Proximity effect, self capacitance Winfield Hill <hill@rowland.harvard.edu> - 2016-09-28 15:38 -0700
Re: More inductor talk, Proximity effect, self capacitance amdx <nojunk@knology.net> - 2016-09-28 19:16 -0500
Re: More inductor talk, Proximity effect, self capacitance amdx <nojunk@knology.net> - 2016-09-28 22:06 -0500
Re: More inductor talk, Proximity effect, self capacitance Winfield Hill <hill@rowland.harvard.edu> - 2016-09-28 20:17 -0700
Re: More inductor talk, Proximity effect, self capacitance amdx <nojunk@knology.net> - 2016-09-29 06:13 -0500
Re: More inductor talk, Proximity effect, self capacitance amdx <nojunk@knology.net> - 2016-09-29 08:29 -0500
Re: More inductor talk, Proximity effect, self capacitance Winfield Hill <hill@rowland.harvard.edu> - 2016-09-29 06:54 -0700
Re: More inductor talk, Proximity effect, self capacitance boB <boB@theresnoplacelikehome.com> - 2016-09-29 11:57 -0700
Re: More inductor talk, Proximity effect, self capacitance Winfield Hill <hill@rowland.harvard.edu> - 2016-09-29 12:29 -0700
Re: More inductor talk, Proximity effect, self capacitance George Herold <gherold@teachspin.com> - 2016-09-29 06:55 -0700
Re: More inductor talk, Proximity effect, self capacitance amdx <nojunk@knology.net> - 2016-09-29 10:59 -0500
Re: More inductor talk, Proximity effect, self capacitance makolber@yahoo.com - 2016-09-29 09:15 -0700
Re: More inductor talk, Proximity effect, self capacitance amdx <nojunk@knology.net> - 2016-09-29 13:16 -0500
csiph-web