2

Taken from here: http://ltwiki.org/?title=Transformers

enter image description here

I am having trouble understanding how the Chan core is actually linking in with the coils.

Does anyone understand what the SPICE code is doing here? Especially in the second half? It may just be lack of familiarity with the syntax or keywords being used.

Xp and Xs are supposed to be coils so I only expect two terminals, but there are three terminals and the Chan core mysteriously links to this third terminal.

But if that is the case then what are the actual Xs and Xp components in the simulation and how is it being interpreted by LTSpice? It seems like it has something to do with the "Winding" keyword but I haven't been able to find out what that is or how it works.

Is the third terminal special terminal activated by the "Winding" keyword that is meant specifically to determine the core? But if it is, then why does the core have two terminals (the other of which is permanently connected to GND via the paramterization in the first half of the code) since there's no current flowing through the core?

DKNguyen
  • 54,733
  • 4
  • 67
  • 153
  • Do you have the .SUBCKT definition for the Winding? – The Photon Nov 20 '19 at 00:27
  • @ThePhoton No unless it's in the link somewhere that I missed – DKNguyen Nov 20 '19 at 01:12
  • 1
    I think it's there. The last code section before what you shared. – The Photon Nov 20 '19 at 01:18
  • @ThePhoton Oh, it is. I'll take a looksie. – DKNguyen Nov 20 '19 at 01:31
  • 1
    May as well link [this](https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/260510/has-ltspice-been-extended-to-support-the-modified-chan-non-linear-hysteretic-mo) as it also discusses Chan. – jonk Nov 20 '19 at 02:58
  • Good thing I saw this in time... I don't know if you solved it, but in case you didn't, if you look closely at the "core-only" symbol, you'll see its middle point different than the one used together with the windings -- that's a connection pin (the point `C` in the picture right above the section shown in your picture, in the ltwiki link). – a concerned citizen Mar 23 '21 at 18:04
  • @aconcernedcitizen I never did get it working satisfactorily – DKNguyen Mar 23 '21 at 21:08
  • @DKNguyen It has its quirks, [like the other alternatives](https://electronics.stackexchange.com/q/326442/95619), but, IMHO, it's the easiest to work with and gives good results. However, I only ever use it when I know there's saturation involved, otherwise coupled inductors will do just fine (as long as you make sure to check the currents). – a concerned citizen Mar 23 '21 at 21:19

0 Answers0