TSSP: List Archives

From: Paul
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 12:29:36 +0000
Subject: [TSSP] Problems with high elevation/small radius

Hi All

As you may be aware, simulations have been singularly unable to repro-
duce f1 measurements on coils at high elevation, hence the restriction
of the model to b < h. For example, we have

 mz1: bare d=0.051m h/d=6.00 sr=0.92 b/h=2.33 turns=875
 f1    885.0kHz 1048.9kHz +18.5%
 f3   2338.0kHz 2525.1kHz +8.0%
 f5   3436.0kHz 3547.5kHz +3.2%

 mz2: bare d=0.051m h/d=6.00 sr=0.87 b/h=2.33 turns=1310
 f1    645.0kHz  705.0kHz +9.3%
 f3   1627.0kHz 1697.1kHz +4.3%

 mz3012-5: bare d=0.089m h/d=3.18 sr=0.88 b/h=1.97 turns=622
 f1    665.9kHz  721.4kHz +8.3%
 f3   1591.1kHz 1694.4kHz +6.5%
 f5   2277.9kHz 2399.1kHz +5.3%

from Mark Rzeszotarski's measurements.

Up to now I've been assuming that the problem with these is poor
determination of the external field - the pattern of reduced errors
at the higher overtones supports that. However, I've been unable to
reproduce the measured f1s using reasonable guesses at the likely
extra unaccounted contributions to Cext. We also have some low
elevation results which exhibit the same kind of error, eg from Mark,

 mz3012-1: bare d=0.089m h/d=3.18 sr=0.88 b/h=0.07 turns=622
 f1    647.8kHz  696.2kHz +7.5%
 f3   1575.4kHz 1656.0kHz +5.1%
 f5   2264.1kHz 2369.4kHz +4.7%

and more recently from Kurt Schraner (welcome to the tssp list Kurt!),

 sk5b185: bare d=0.051m h/d=8.03 sr=0.91 b/h=0.45 turns=934
 f1    919.5kHz 1027.0kHz +11.7%

Both mz3012-1 and sk5b185 are at low elevation, albeit over poorly
defined grounds, so I want to explore the possibility that it is the
small radii that is to blame, rather than high elevation, in the hope
that we can clear up this long standing problem. The only other narrow
coil that we have a result for is Marc Metlicka's coil #1, ie

 mm1: bare d=0.091m h/d=8.92 sr=0.76 b/h=0.41 turns=1221
 f1    455.5kHz  466.3kHz +2.4%

which also begins to show signs of a positive prediction error.

The 'small radii' angle opens up a few more options, eg former
material relative permittivity is one that comes to mind. Up to now
the working assumption has been that the volume of material is small
compared to the coil diameter and has negligible effect. This may not
be true at small radius.

Right now I've no means of calculating the effect of former
dielectric on the Cint and Cext physical capacitances.

Does anyone have a small coil, eg < 8cm diameter, of thin former
material, into which another tube can be slid inside, to a reasonably
close fit? The with/without f1 readings would give us an idea whether
an f1 shift of the right order of magnitude can possibly be caused by
the former material.

Of course, another possibility is that small amounts of stray
capacitance, unaccounted by the program, are depressing the measured
frequencies.  We might expect this to affect both small radii and
high elevation coils. An additional 1pF near the top of mz3012-1 and
sk5b185 is enough to cure the problem, but I can't see where this
might be coming from.

Suggestions, and further measurements on small radius coils, are most
welcome.

Cheers,
--
Paul Nicholson,
Manchester, UK.
--


Maintainer Paul Nicholson, paul@abelian.demon.co.uk.