A Fuzzy Decision Support System For Magnetic Component Design THESIS-D.holt-1996-08

A Fuzzy Decision Support System for
Magnetic Component Design

A96.037(741)
Masters Thesis
August 1996
D.Holt
A Fuzzy Decision Support System

for
Magnetic Component Design
D.Holt
Masters Thesis
A96.037(741)
August 1996
Supervisors:
Prof. Ir. G. Honderd

Prof. Ir. H.R. van Nauta Lemke
Dr. Ir. J.B. Klaassens
Ir. U. Kaymak
Delft University of Technology

Department of Electrical Engineering
Control Laboratory
P.O. Box 5031
2600 GA Delft
The Netherlands
To My Parents
PREFACE
This thesis has been written within the framework of my graduation at the Control Laboratory
at the faculty of Electrical Engineering of Delft University of Technology. It is meant to
provide a concept for easing and enhancing the design of magnetic components by means of
a decision support system. Such a system may also be a help for designers of electrical
systems who have no access to expertise and accessible literature about magnetics.
What made the research especially interesting, was the fact that it enclosed the uncommon
mixture of theory on magnetics, magnetic component design and human and fuzzy decision
making. During the research, I have been guided by my supervisors with energy and humour.
Therefore, I am glad to be in the opportunity to thank Prof. Honderd for his everlasting energy
to keep the laboratory prosperous, dr. Klaassens for his positive view on life, ir. Kaymak for
his witty and always supporting presence, and prof. van Nauta Lemke for his comprehensive
view on almost everything. Together with the members of student fraternity VerstelRegel of
the laboratory, they have made the last period of my student life a very pleasant and
instructive one.
The reader of this report does not need a thorough understanding of magnetics or fuzzy
decision making. Necessary information about magnetics can be found in appendix A and
about fuzzy decision making in section 3.4. The decision support system has been written by
means of the computer language Matlab. Using some basic tools available for processing
fuzzy logic together with the theory described in this thesis, the reader can create such a
computer program him or herself easily.
July 1996
Danil Holt
Contents
CONTENTS
SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
1. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
2. MAGNETIC COMPONENTS . . . .
2.1. Classification . . . . . . . . . .
2.2. Component elements . . . . .
2.2.1 cores . . . . . . . . . . .
2.2.2 wires . . . . . . . . . . .
2.3. Example: AC-inductor . . . .
2.3.1 Application . . . . . . .
2.3.2 Airgap and Equations
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
15
15
17
17
19
20
20
21
3. DESIGN AND DECISION MAKING . . . . . . . .

3.1. Magnetic component design . . . . . . . . . .
3.2. Decision making in design . . . . . . . . . . .
3.3. Traditional design procedure . . . . . . . . . .
3.3.1 methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.3.2 disadvantages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.4. Fuzzy Multiple Attribute Decision Making
3.4.1 decision matrix . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.4.2 fuzzy sets theory . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.4.3 fuzzy decision criteria . . . . . . . . .
3.4.4 aggregation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.4.5 decision tree . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
23
23
24
26
26
28
29
29
31
32
35
38
4. DSS FOR AC-INDUCTOR DESIGN . . . . . . . .

4.1. Design information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4.1.1 design criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4.1.2 additional expert knowledge . . . .
4.2. DSS structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4.2.1 Initial selection . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4.2.2 removal of dominated alternatives
4.2.3 final ranking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
41
41
41
46
48
49
50
50
5. RESULTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.1. Airplane application . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.2. Locomotive application . . . . . . . . .
5.3. Mass product application . . . . . . . .
5.4. Airplane appl. with L=3.5mH, L=4A
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
56
56
60
62
64
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
6. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
10
APPENDIX A:
THEORY OF MAGNETIC COMPONENTS
A.1. Maxwells Equations . . . . . . . . .
A.2. Core characteristics . . . . . . . . . .
A.3. Airgap issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
A.4. Wire characteristics . . . . . . . . . .
A.5. Power losses and temperature rise
A.6. Important equations . . . . . . . . . .
Contents
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
66
66
69
71
75
76
80
APPENDIX B: AC-INDUCTOR APPLICATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83

B.1. Inverter equations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
B.2. Design example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
APPENDIX D: SYMBOLS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
Summary
11
SUMMARY
In many areas of electrical engineering, magnetic components like transformers and inductors
are necessary parts of an electrical circuit. Magnetic components are composed of two core
halves of magnetic material and turns of copper wire. For some applications, an airgap of
arbitrary length can be introduced between the core halves. Designing a magnetic component
means finding a suitable combination of core, wire and airgap size, while a great variety of
criteria have to be satisfied. The criteria consist of physical constraints (e.g. maximum storable
energy, maximum allowable temperature rise), application requirements (e.g. inductance,
allowed power loss), and designer preferences (e.g. preferred weight, cost). The criteria depend
strongly on the application the component is designed for.
Many different types and sizes of core and wire are available. Hence, a large number of
different combinations is possible, which complicates the design. Therefore, a designer of
magnetic components uses a design method that iterates towards some feasible design.
Because of the variety of criteria and the mutual dependencies of the component attributes,
extensive knowledge and experience of the designer is required to make efficient and effective
decisions during the iteration steps. Despite the human ability to come to some feasible design,
the traditional method is not efficient and may cause a sub-optimal design.
In this thesis, a Decision Support System (DSS) is proposed using fuzzy logic and fuzzy
Multiple Attribute Decision Making (MADM). The DSS assist a designer in selecting suitable
combinations of core, wire and airgap size by distinguishing the set of possible alternatives
and ranking them corresponding with how much they satisfy the criteria. As an example, a
system is developed that is focused on the design of an AC-inductor. However, the concepts
of the DSS can be used for many kinds of magnetic components.
To create the DSS, two types of information are defined that are necessary to design a
component. Firstly, the design criteria are set up. Because the criteria can be vague, imprecise
or uncertain, the mathematical representation is based on fuzzy set theory. Secondly, necessary
additional expert knowledge is retrieved, in this case acquired by having an expert
participating in the realization of the system. The expert knowledge consists of various
information such as assumptions and heuristic knowledge.
The decision procedure of the DSS is multi-step to provide both a transparant decision
structure as well as a faster evaluation of the large number of alternatives. The initial decision
steps reject the inappropriate combinations using the hard limiting boundaries of the criteria.
The final decision step ranks the remaining alternatives by means of fuzzy MADM methods.
At the end of the process, the designer can concentrate on the recommended set of
alternatives, and choose the preferred component using his subjective and context sensitive
human opinion. In this way the quantitative power of computers and qualitative abilities of
humans are used efficiently. Magnetic component design using the proposed DSS is faster than
the traditional method and increases the possibility to find a near optimal or optimal inductor
alternative.
12
Introduction
Introduction
13
1. INTRODUCTION
This thesis is concentrated on the design of magnetic components. Although existing for more
than a hundred years, magnetic components are still essential elements of electrical circuits,
serving applications such as transforming power, filtering and resonating. In power electronics
magnetic components are essential for the operation of converters, in addition to the power
semiconductors and capacitors. In telecommunications they are used for accurate filtering
purposes. The two most commonly used magnetic components are the transformer and
inductor, which are basically composed of a core of magnetic material and turns of insulated
copper wire. The number of available sizes and types of premanufactured cores and wires is
large, so many combinations are possible. For several applications, an airgap of arbitrary width
can be introduced between two core halves, where energy can be stored. The range of possible
airgap volume results in a respective range of possible numbers of turns of the wire. This
range increases the number of alternatives considerably.
Designing a magnetic component means finding the optimal combination of core, wire and
number of turns, while a great variety of application dependent criteria have to be satisfied.
It is important to find this optimal alternative, since a magnetic component has an important
influence on weight, volume, efficiency and cost of the overall electrical system it is used for.
In order to manage the large number of component alternatives and the variety of criteria, a
human designer applies an iterative design procedure to find the optimal alternative. The
decisions will be made while making extensive use of experience, rules-of-thumb and
application tables in catalogues. Still, the human design method requires a lot of time that is
involved in iterating, and the method may also result in a sub-optimal final design.
With the developments in artificial intelligence and fuzzy logic, it can be expected that
computers not only perform the required calculations, but can also help the designer with the
trade-offs that have to be made. A Decision Support System (DSS) will be able to assist him
by selecting a set of feasible alternatives and ranking them depending on how much they
satisfy the design requirements.
This thesis describes several aspects of component design and proposes a Decision Support
System. In chapter 2, the construction of magnetic components is described and an example
is introduced, namely the AC-inductor in a power electronics application. Chapter 3 explains
what kind of decisions have to be made in component design and discusses the traditional
design method and Fuzzy Multiple Attribute Decision Making, a method that can make
decisions using vague information. In chapter 4 the design information and knowledge
necessary to create the DSS is described, and a system structure is established. Finally, the
results of a computer program are shown and evaluated.
Papers on the same subject are reference [9] and [40].
14
Magnetic Components
Magnetic Components
15
2. MAGNETIC COMPONENTS
This chapter explains what magnetic components are and how they are constructed. To clarify
some important facets of a magnetic component, an example is shown of an AC-inductor in
a power electronics converter.
2.1. Classification
Magnetic components are those components of an electrical circuit that use a magnetic circuit
to fulfil their task. In many areas of electrical engineering they are necessary parts of the
circuit. Various applications are possible, such as transforming power, providing galvanic
isolation, filtering, resonating and other. In power electronics, magnetic components are
essential for the operation of power converters, in addition to the power semiconductors and
capacitors. In telecommunications and radio and television, magnetic components are widely
used for filtering applications.
A basic classification of magnetic components is the following:

1. Inductor:
- AC inductor,
- AC inductor with DC bias;
2. Transformer:
- two-winding transformer
- multiple winding transformer,
- multiple core transformer;
3. Transductor;
4. Electrical machines.
The following list gives a short description of several applications:
1.
Filter inductors, resonance inductors:

controlling energy flow to a load, blocking unwanted frequencies, resonance in LC
circuit;
2.
Saturating inductors:
regulating voltage or power by saturation of a section of the core;
3.
Power transformers:
transforming power from one winding to another on a common core with minimum
losses;
4.
Current-, voltage-, impedance- or pulse-transformers:

carrying over special current, voltage or impedance levels or waveform shapes as
precisely as possible;
16
Magnetic Components
5.
Sensor inductors:
Using the airgap properties as position or distance sensor
5.
Transductors, magnetic amplifiers:

providing controllable inductance varied by means of a control current;
6.
Rotating electrical machines:

Converting electrical energy into mechanical energy and vice versa, respectively motors
and generators.
7.
Magnetic bearing, magnetic levitation:

providing the possibility of frictionless rotation or translation (reference [24])
In this research we will study the design of magnetic components that transform electrical
energy into magnetic energy and vice versa, while satisfying certain characteristics.
Transformers and inductors meet this description. Transductors, however, will be excluded
from the discussed design methods, because their design is focused on the capability to vary
certain component characteristics. Also rotating electrical machines will be excluded, because
their design is mainly focused on the optimal transformation of magnetic energy into
mechanical energy and vice versa.
The transformer as well as the inductor are basically composed of a core of magnetic material
and turns of insulated copper wire. The theoretical backgrounds on magnetics can be found
in appendix A. A simplified explanation on the functioning of the core and the wire is given
in the following lines:
One or more of the windings carry a changing electric current, and they induce a changing
magnetic field in the core. The function of the core is to conduct this magnetic field in a
predictable way, analogous to the way copper wire conducts electrical current. The energy in
the core carried by the magnetic field can be given to another winding instantly or stored
temporarily in an airgap or in material inserted in the core. The elementary description of
transformers and inductors is the following: a transformer or an inductor consist of a core and
one or more windings, utilizing their magnetic circuit to respectively transform or store
energy.
Magnetic Components
17
2.2. Component elements

Magnetic components are assembled from the following elements:
-
magnetic material;
electrical conductive material;
insulation materials
thermal parts
(coil former, wire insulation, layer insulation);

(heat sink).
To exemplify the construction, Figure 2. shows three basic parts of the component: wire, coil
former (bobbin) and core.
Figure 2.
Three basic component elements:

a) coil former and wire,
b) core of E-type.
Figure 3.
Cross-section of assembled component.
The component is assembled by winding the wire around the coil former and then joining the
core halves together. Between the core halves, an airgap can be introduced. Figure 3. shows
a cross-section of a magnetic component when assembled. The so called winding area or
window is the area containing the coil former and windings. In the following paragraphs
various aspects of cores and wires are described.
2.2.1 cores
Cores for magnetic components are made of material that is able to conduct magnetic flux
easily. Examples are, laminated iron, powdered iron, MPP, Permalloy, Supermalloy and
Ferrite. The modern high-performance components invariably use a ferrite core. Ferrite is a
brittle material consisting of compounds like: MnZn, NiZn, MgZn, LiZn [15] or Fe2O3 with
NiO, MnO, ZnO, CoO [28]. Ferrite has a very high electric resistivity, a relatively low
magnetic resistivity and is easy to manufacture in an arbitrary shape. Some ferrites can be
used for very high frequencies up to several MHz.
18
Magnetic Components
More than 15 different ferrite core shapes

can be obtained from the manufacturers,
such as:
E, EC, Pot, RM, ETD, U, I, X, EP, H, PH,
EFD, ring, rod, tube. The first four shapes
are the most commonly used and are applicable for more general purposes. The relative
dimensions of most of these shapes have
already been optimized and are standardized
in IEC norms1. The shapes are available in
a range of sizes and in several kinds of
ferrite. Each shape and ferrite type has some Figure 4.
RM-core with coil former and clasps.
preferred power or filter application, indicated by tables in the catalogues2. However, these tables only give advice to the component
designer in his choice of core, but they do not guarantee whether this choice is the best
choice.
The cores are characterized by means of various parameters.
The core dimensional parameters are:
Ac : equivalent core leg section area
Vc : equivalent core volume (amount of ferrite in mm3)
V
: volume of complete core
Aw : available winding area
: mean length of turn
t
Acool : component cooling area
Acool is the outside area of the core, plus the area of the heatsink. In this
thesis, heatsinks are not considered.
The core material parameters are:
Bsat
Bbend
c
kc, n
Kc
:
:
:
:
:
:
)
saturation flux density (maximum physically possible B
bending point of BH-loop
curie temperature (maximum allowable core temperature)
parameters that express specific core loss Pc for a certain frequency
permeability (usually >>1)
cost of core + coil former [Hfl] (without cost of winding and assembling)
By means of these parameters, all calculations necessary for this thesis can be performed.
1)
An example of an IEC norm:dimensions of RM-cores made of magnetic oxides

and associated parts, Int. Electrotechnical Commission, Publication 431, Geneva
1983.
2)
application tables: [15] pp.46-48 or [28] pp.134-138
Magnetic Components
19
2.2.2 wires
The available wire can be solid round, solid flat or
bunched (Litz wire), each available in a range of copper
cross-section areas and with different classes of insulation. Some examples of wire types and sizes are shown
in Figure 5. Each wire type has specific characteristics.
For example, flat wire uses space efficiently, but is
difficult to wind and more expensive. Round wire is
easy to wind and cheap, but is not space efficient.
Figure 5.
Examples of different wire
A more sophisticated type of wire is the Litzendraht or

types.
Litz wire (see [12]). Litz wire has conductor strands that
are transposed in such a way that it reduces both
external proximity effects and internal skin effects of the wire. From a designers point of
view it is useful to determine whether it is advantageous to replace solid wire by Litz wire
for a particular application. Litz wire provides a significant improvement over solid wire at
lower frequencies, with a continual improvement increase up to a frequency fo. Beyond this
frequency, local proximity losses begin to increase until the losses of Litz wire are higher than
solid wire at a frequency fmax. Increasing the number of strands will widen the useful
frequency range, but decreases utilization of the winding area
Wire is characterized by means of the following parameters:

N
: discrete number of turns
AN : wire section area
: wire fill factor
kw
kac : AC-current resistance factor
Rw,s : specific resistance of wire [m-1]
mw,s : specific weight of wire [kgm-1]
Kw,s : specific cost of wire [Hfl.m-1]
The three latter quantities are not always provided by catalogues, but can easily be calculated
from other available quantities in the catalogue.
When choosing the component elements,

several discrete degrees of freedom for the
CORE
WIRE
core and wire are available. Table I. gives an
overview of their basic degrees of freedom.
material
type
Data sheets with some samples of the different
shape
cross section area
cores and the wires are shown in Table III. and
Table IV. in appendix C. It is obvious that
size
fill factor
many different combinations of cores and wires
are possible. The number of alternatives even
increases if we allow a variable number of
Table I.
Basic degrees of freedom of core and wire.
turns.
20
Magnetic Components
2.3. Example: AC-inductor

In magnetic component design there is no such thing as one design procedure for all applications or one design procedure for one component type: different components in different
applications entail differences in the design procedure and criteria. The concepts described in
this thesis can be used for all components. In order to come to a detailed insight in the aspects
of magnetic component design, this thesis is focused on the design of an AC-inductor.
The use of an AC-inductor as example has two advantages. The first advantage is that the
applied equations are less complicated because the core is symmetrically excitated, like in
transformer design. The second advantage is, that the number number of component
alternatives is very high because the airgap can take variable discrete lengths. Deciding about
more alternatives makes the decision process more comprehensive and clarifying.
2.3.1 Application
Figure 6.
Inductor used in output filter.
Because inductors have the ability to store energy, they are typically used for filtering purposes like smoothing an electrical signal, or gaining (resonance). In Figure 6., the inductor L
has been used as low pass filter applied in inverters that convert DC voltage into AC power.
The purpose of the LC-filter is to remove the high frequency components from voltage es*.
Voltage es* may be generated by some switch-bridge. Appendix B gives relevant equations for
this application. dc to AC inverters are used for many applications, like in locomotives,
airplanes, cars or other applications that use batteries.
Besides electrical specifications like current wave shape, maximum current, inductance or frequency, the AC-inductor also has to satisfy several specifications and preferences that depend
strongly on the application the inverter is used for. Examples are minimum and maximum
values for weight, volume, power loss, cost or temperature rise.
Magnetic Components
21
Possible examples of criteria imposed on an AC-inductor in for example aircraft applications

are:
- low weight
- low size
- low power losses
- cost unimportant
- reliable
- component temperature low during operation
It will not be possible to satisfy all these requirements on the AC-inductor ideally. Severe
trade-offs have to be made. The AC-inductor we want to design consists of a core with an
airgap and a winding with a certain number of turns. Different alternative combinations of
core, wire and number of turns might satisfy the requirements, some maybe more than others.
To obtain a better insight in the characteristics of the inductor alternatives, it might be useful
to give some physical relationships of the AC-inductor in the next section. Appendix A and
B provide a more detailed explanation.
2.3.2 Airgap and Equations
An AC-inductor has the property to store energy in its magnetic circuit by means of a small
airgap or a piece of low permeability material introduced between two core halves.
Manufacturers offer cores that have a gap that is cut beforehand or dispensed in the core
material. However, many component designers create their own gap by inserting a piece of
synthetic material with a certain width between the core halves (Figure 3.). In this way
designers have much more freedom in choice of core size, geometry and material. Because
this method is widely used and also very effective, we will incorporate the method in this
research. The typical airgap length g is 0.1mm...2mm. In this thesis, calculations are mainly
performed by means of airgap volume Vg, and not airgap length g. The reason is, that Vg can
easily be calculated into magnetic flux density B or number of turns N and vice versa.
The most
L
L
N
B
Vg
important relationships in inductor design are the relationships between:

: inductance,
: peak inductor current,
: number of turns (discrete),
: excitation flux density in the core,
: airgap volume.
Appendix A, equation (A.19) shows that if relative permeability r 1 (for ferrite), then almost
all energy is stored in the airgap volume Vg. Assuming that L and L are specified, then
stored
equation (1) (equivalent to (A.46) of appendix A) shows that the maximum energy W
c
in the airgap Vg is:
W
c
with o the magnetic constant.
1
2
LL
2
B Vg
2o
(1)
22
Magnetic Components
From this equation can be found, that product B 2Vg of equation (1) determines the energy
stored in the airgap: when airgap volume Vg is chosen 4x smaller, then excitation B has to
be 2x larger in order to store the same amount of energy Wc. This equation is not dependent
on the applied core or wire.
Also the number of turns N is inversely proportional to B , shown by equation (2) (equivalent
to (A.45)). The ratio between N and B depends on the core section area Ac and the electrical
specifications L and L:
B
1 LL
N Ac
(2)
Vg can take any value, resulting in a continuous range of B and therefore N. However, N can
only be discrete, so each alternative core/wire/N will take only discrete values for B and Vg.
In this chapter we have described what magnetic components are, of which elements they
consist, and we have given some application example and equations. But, how is the magnetic
component designed? What is a good component and how do we come to such a design? How
do we make the necessary decisions? The next chapter will answer these questions.
Magnetic Components
23
3. DESIGN AND DECISION MAKING
This chapter describes the role of decision making in magnetic component design and gives
some examples of traditional design methods. Then, a decision making method is introduced
that handles vague information. With this method, vagueness and imprecision as used in
human reasoning can be implemented in a computer program. In that way the fuzzy aspects
of magnetic component design are dealt with, like fuzzy criteria and latent aggregation3.
3.1. Magnetic component design

To assemble a magnetic component, a set of cores of different shapes, sizes and ferrite grades
is available. Furthermore, a set of different wire types is available, each type with a range of
copper cross section areas. Because the size of the airgap can be chosen arbitrarily, also the
numbers of turns can vary. In this thesis the general goal of inductor design is to find the core,
the wire and the number of turns, so that the combination satisfies the imposed criteria as well
as possible. Figure 7. clarifies how an inductor alternative is composed.
Figure 7.
The construction of inductor alternatives from the elements

core, wire and number of turns.
Why do we want to find a so called best inductor in this discrete optimization problem? The
reason for this is that an inductor, like a transformer, has an important influence on the cost
and on the overall performance of the system for which it is applied.
3)
Latent aggregation is the hidden way in which humans combine judgments upon
different aspects of a subject into one overall judgment upon the subject.
24
Magnetic Components
The influence on the overall performance is caused by three troublesome characteristics of

magnetic components:
1) they are often relatively large and heavy items of a circuit,
2) they produce losses and heat,
3) they are not easy to wind and assemble automatically.
In practice, it will be difficult to find a design that has only optimal parameter values, because
of the interaction and interdependence of the parameters. To achieve the most desirable design,
component parameters affecting others have to be traded off as necessary. For example, if a
small volume and a low weight are of great significance, then reduction in weight and volume
may be possible by selecting a more efficient core material. However, this has a severe
penalty of increased cost. Hence, to find the best possible component alternative, careful tradeoffs must be effected to achieve the design goal.
To find the appropriate combination of elements, decisions have to be made about which core,
wire and number of turns to take. This decision process can be performed in several ways, like
choosing each component element separately, or choosing between complete alternatives, and
deciding in many steps or in one step. It can be stated that the design of an inductor is the
decision process that in the end satisfies the design goal. The goal is to find the combination
of elements that form the best achievable inductor. What actually is a decision process? The
answer is given in the next section.
3.2. Decision making in design

The three basic ingredients of the decision making process are the decision maker, the
alternatives and the criteria, defined as follows:
1) The decision maker:
The decision maker is the person or the computer performing some algorithm that will
produce an ordering on the set of inductor alternatives as the result of a decision making
process. The most significant difference between computers and humans as decision maker
is, that computers have strong quantitative power, while humans are able to deal with
qualitative aspects of decision problems. Therefore, a computer method to make a decision
will be different from the method of a human decider
2) The inductor alternatives:
The alternatives are the discrete elements we have to choose from. They can be regarded as
discrete elements in a continuous alternative space. In our design problem, the set of inductor
alternatives consists of all physically possible combinations of core, wire and number of turns.
Each alternative has its own specific parameter values.
Magnetic Components
25
An example of an alternative and its parameter values is the following:

Example of an AC-inductor alternative:
- Core
type
: E-core
size
: EC70
material
: 3C80
- Wire
type
copper area
fill factor
- Number of turns
Attributes
Vg
B
m
V
K
Pc
Pw
Ptot
: Solid Round Enamelled Wire

: 1.22mm2
: kw = 0.6
: 185.
of this alternative (application: L = 4mH, L = 4A):

= 837mm3 : airgap volume (airgap length 3mm)
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
310mT
460g
81.1cm3
.31,3W
10W
13W
46C
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
flux density excitation

weight
size
cost
core loss
wire loss
total power losses
temperature rise
Some of the attributes are directly used as performance parameters in the decision making
process, such as weight, volume, cost, total power loss or temperature rise. Other parameters
play an indirect role, such as the airgap volume Vg or flux density B .
3) The objectives and constraints (criteria):
In order to accomplish the general design goal, the component aimed at must satisfy the
prescribed objectives and the imposed constraints as well as possible. As will be described in
3.4.3, the objectives and the constraints can be used in an identical way in the decision
problem, because they can be modelled in an identical way. Together they are also called the
decision criteria and they are the standards of judgment to test the acceptability of an
alternative. The criteria imposed in inductor design may consist of physical constraints,
application requirements (as described in section 2.3) or designer preferences. These criteria
can be hard, which means that the criterion has a strict boundary, or soft, meaning that its
boundary is vague, imprecise or uncertain.
26
Magnetic Components
Some examples of criteria are given below. We can see that the vague boundaries are
expressed by human expressions like about or near to.
arbitrary examples of criteria:
physical constraints:
- the airgap width must not be larger than about 1.5mm, because of the fringing field,
- the flux density has decreasing preference from 300mT up to 375mT,
- max = 125C.
application requirements:
- the total inductor weight has to be as small as possible,
- m < 400g,
- the inductor must be able to operate with a maximum ambient temperature of 60C.
designer preferences:
- the total inductor weight must be near to 400g,
- the costs of the component are not important at all,
- an inductor that costs more than $20 is possible, but not preferred.
We have described the general design goal and the decision making aspects of inductor design.
The decision problem is a Multiple Attribute Decision Making problem (MADM). MADM
refers to finding the best component alternative out of all discrete alternatives in the presence
of multiple, usually conflicting, criteria upon the attributes. Human designers and computers
each have their own characteristic way of coping with these conflicting criteria, as described
in 3.3 and 3.4.
3.3. Traditional design procedure

In this section the human design method is described. Finding an appropriate alternative in the
traditional way means a continuous sequence of calculating and deciding about component
element. To come to a final design, a human designer will not assess all possible alternatives,
but will cautiously iterate towards an acceptable component.
3.3.1 methods
Traditionally, designing a magnetic component meant calculating the optimal core geometry,
while making trade-offs between parameters and criteria. In this period, a computer could be
used to solve the large amount of tedious equations [11]. After this design, the component had
to be manufactured custom-made. Nowadays, we make use of premanufactured cores that have
predetermined and optimized core geometries and sizes. However, the large number of
available sizes and types of cores and wires complicates the design. Only experienced
designers in this field are capable of determining a limited collection of parts to be able to
design the optimal component within the range of requirements. To help a designer with the
decisions, manufacturers provide their catalogues with tables, graphs and advices. However,
because the criteria can be vague, imprecise or uncertain, a human decider has to make use
of his human ability to deal with vague information.
Magnetic Components
27
We start with a short description of an expert designing a magnetic component. In general,

a human designer starts with the selection of a core from the catalogue or stock as initial step.
This selection is performed by using experience, physical and heuristic knowledge, rules-ofthumb and advices from the catalogue. After this initial selection, the design is in essence an
iterative trial and error process split in the following aspects:
1. Magnetic design:
calculation of the magnetic field:
stored energy,
magnetizing current,
air gap,
permeability.
resulting in:
number of turns N,
losses magnetic circuit.
2. electric design:
type of conductor (mainly litz wire),
mass of winding,
increase of dc resistance fac,
copper fill factor fw.
resulting in:
winding losses.
3. thermal design:
total losses,
cooling surface,
maximum temperature rise of the surface,
resulting in:
maximum temperature rise of the hot spot,
4. economic design:
costs of materials,
costs of production.
The outcome of each step determines whether the designer has to choose another core or wire.
Three examples of inductor design are shown in the following sections. Two textual
procedures come from [29] and [15], and Figure 8. comes from [14] (pp. 766). The bold and
underlined words in the textual versions show the places where a human decision has to be
performed, or where human knowledge has to be used.
28
Magnetic Components
From reference [29]:

1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
choose the wire size nearest that specified by

equation ...
select a core with dimensions reasonably close
to the optimum specified by equation ...,
calculate turns per layer and number of layers,
and determine the total winding build
check for fit. The wire size may need to be
adjusted up or down.
calculate the inductance of the actual design to
ensure that no numerical errors have been
made, using Equation
From reference [15]:

Design procedures:
1)
On the basis of the operating characteristics and
design limitations, select the core size, material
grade, inductance factor and conductor type
using the information given in the data sheets.
2)
Using the adjustment curve, check that the
range of adjustment is sufficient to cover the
tolerance on AL or e and that of the resonating
capacitor. Make an allowance of about 1% for
circuit strays.
3)
Calculate the number of turns required from the
Figure 8.
Example of iterative design procedure for
AL or value for the core.
inductor design ([14] pp.766).
4)
Select a conductor size to fill the coil former.
5)
From the voltage across the inductor, ERMS,
determine peak flux density Bpeak. If this is in excess of 1 mT, check that hysteresis loss and distortion are acceptable (by reference to the a.c. signal-level characteristics in the core data).
3.3.2 disadvantages
The human procedure has two drawbacks. The first drawback is that the designer has limited
insight in the consequences of a decision. Because it is not clear whether a certain choice of
core or wire leads to a better inductor or not, many iterations may be necessary. Even if a
computer is used to perform the tedious calculations, then still the method is inefficient The
second drawback of the human procedure is, that the designer may reject many alternatives
too early in the decision process, because he does not assess all possible configurations of
cores and wires. Finding the optimal design may not be possible in this way. Despite the
designers ability to make fuzzy and intelligent decisions, the human design method is
inefficient an ineffective.
To get around the drawbacks of this method, designers are supported with tables in books or
catalogues that simplify the initial choice of the core . The first computer algorithms were
implemented in the 60s, taking over calculations. However, the critical decisions have always
been taken by the designer himself, because only human knowledge and experience could
handle the fuzzy criteria and complex trade-offs.
Magnetic Components
29
With the developments in artificial intelligence and fuzzy logic, new doors have been opened
towards automated decision making in magnetic component design. The next section describes
a method to rank a set of feasible component alternatives, dependent on how much they
satisfy the design constraints and preferences. To model the imprecise and uncertain criteria,
the concepts of fuzzy sets and fuzzy decision making are introduced.
3.4. Fuzzy Multiple Attribute Decision Making

In order to create a Decision Support System for a human designer, we will introduce a means
that allows a computer to find some good component alternatives in the presence of multiple,
conflicting criteria. Section 3.2 shows that imposed criteria can be vague or imprecise. In this,
the deficiency of a computer is that it cannot process these qualitative concepts. To overcome
this problem, we will introduce fuzzy sets in order to provide a mathematical tool that models
vague and imprecise criteria. We enter the area of Fuzzy Multiple Attribute Decision Making.
A lot have been written about Fuzzy MADM. Reference [3] provides an extensive
bibliography on the subject. Other references are [2], [17], [25] and [31].
3.4.1 decision matrix
To illustrate the interaction of alternatives, criteria, and decision, in Figure 9. a decision matrix
is shown:
attr./crit.
weights
c1
w1
cm
wm
a1
r11
r1m
r21
r2m
alternatives
an
Figure 9.
ratings
rn1
rnm
d1
final rating
di
General decision matrix of a decision problem
The definition of the decision elements is:

{a1,a2, ,an}
-
the discrete alternatives ai form a very large set of possible combinations of

core, wire and number of turns.
{c1,c2, ,cm}
-
the criteria ci are the set of objectives and constraints that the alternatives
should satisfy (e.g. criterion cj: inductor weight m should be smaller than
400g). By means of these criteria the performance or appraisal of the
alternative attributes is measured.
30
Magnetic Components
{w1,w2, ,wm}
-
the relative importance wj of the criteria cj (e.g. wj expresses that criterion

on the cost of an inductor is 2 times more important than the criterion on
power loss). The term importance is used instead of the common term
weight, because the latter term is used in the sense of mass in inductor
design.
rij = r(ai,cj)
-
the ratings (scores) rij express the performance of alternative ai with respect
to criterion cj (e.g. rij=0.7 means that ai is fairly compatible with criterion
cj).
di = D(ri1,ri2, ,rim,w1,w2, ,wm)

Final rating di is the overall rating of alternative ai formed by combining
ratings {ri1, ,rim}, if necessary using importances {w1,w2, ,wm}. The operator
that performs the aggregation is goal function D.
Latent aggregation is the hidden way in which humans combine judgments upon different
aspects of a subject into one overall judgment upon the subject.
An inductor alternative ai is optimal with respect to the general design goal when it obtains
the highest final rating di. di reflects how much the design goal is satisfied. Its value is
determined by the following three elements of the decision problem:
- The implicit or explicit definition of the criteria cj (the objectives and the constraints).
- The allotment of the importance wj
- The choice of goal function D that combines rij and wj into di.
For many decision problems only fuzzy information is available, like vague specifications or
preferences imposed by human opinion. To implement this fuzziness, the information can be
modelled by means of fuzzy sets, as shown in the following section. Several elements of the
decision matrix can be fuzzy, like the criteria, the importance, or the ratings. We assume that
in our problem only the criteria are fuzzy, and the ratings are not fuzzy (crisp).
Because ratings in our decision problem rij are crisp values, the decision making method looks
like traditional non-fuzzy decision making with some utility function U as goal function. The
most important difference is that the concept of this utility function depends heavily on
probability theory for the axioms that characterize it. Our goal function D, is induced from
human fuzzy values and from empirical determination of operators that express the hidden
way in which humans combine judgments on different aspects of an alternative into one
overall judgment.
Magnetic Components
31
3.4.2 fuzzy sets theory

Fuzzy logic has been proposed by Zadeh in the 1960s (reference [34]) as a means to model
uncertainty of non-probabilistic nature. It is an extension of conventional (Boolean) logic. A
good example of this uncertainty is vague, imprecise or uncertain information as used by
human reasoning. Fuzzy logic introduces the concept of partial truth values that lie between
completely true and completely false. There is a strong relation between fuzzy logic and fuzzy
sets theory, similarly to the relationship between Boolean logic and conventional set theory.
Fuzzy sets theory is introduced as an extension of conventional sets theory, allowing partial
membership in the set. A fuzzy set C is defined in the universe of discourse X via its
characteristic function, usually called membership function, fc(x) : X [0,1] that is defined
as follows:4
fc(x) = 1
x belongs completely to C
fc(x) (0,1)
x belongs partially to C
x does not belong to C
fc(x) = 0
The terms membership function and fuzzy set are sometimes used interchangeably. The
value of the membership function fc(x) is called membership degree. In Figure 10. an example
is shown of the fuzzy set A that describes the fuzzy set fc(m) of the human expression about
300grams.
Figure 10.
fuzzy set of m is about 300g.
Figure 11.
Fuzzy set with trapezoidal shape.
The value m=275g belongs with a degree of f(x)=0.4 to the set weight of about 300g. The
value m=340g has a degree of membership of f(x)=0.1. The slopes of a fuzzy set can be
regarded as fuzzy boundaries. A non-fuzzy parameter value or range that only carries
membership values 0 or 1 is called crisp. The fuzzy set can also be represented as a
trapezoidal figure constructed of four points a., b., c. and d. as shown in Figure 11. This shape
does hardly differ from the smooth version, while calculations are easier to perform. Points
b. and c. will be called the shoulder values of the fuzzy set, indicated with subscript s (e.g.
mmaxs).
4)
Literature on fuzzy sets normally uses parameter (x) to express the membership
function. However, because the theory on magnetics uses to express the
permeability of magnetic material, we have chosen f(x) as membership function.
32
Magnetic Components
The formal fuzzy set theory states that the imprecision expressed by a fuzzy set is meant in
the sense of human vagueness rather than the lack of knowledge about a parameter value as
in tolerance analysis. However, because fuzzy sets theory is such a powerful modelling
language, in this thesis some context dependent modifications have been allowed. Lack of
precise knowledge and other uncertain situations will be modeled by the fuzzy set.
The next section explains how the fuzzy criteria in our decision problem are represented by
fuzzy sets.
3.4.3 fuzzy decision criteria
In a by now classical paper, Bellman and Zadeh [1] suggested fuzzy set theory as a suitable
conceptual framework for decision making under various objectives and constraints. The
objectives and constraints, or criteria ci, that have a vague, imprecise or uncertain nature can
be modeled by the fuzzy set fc(x). This fuzzy set represents to what degree an attribute value
of an alternative satisfies the criteria. Figure 12. shows some arbitrarily chosen fuzzy sets fc(x)
of criteria cj that can be imposed on the design of an inductor. Section 4.1.1 explains how the
shoulder values are determined:
Figure 12.
Examples of membership functions expressing criteria.
Explanation on some criteria of Figure 12.:

In Figure 12.a, fuzzy sets fc(B) and fc(Vg) entail the physical constraints imposed on magnetic
flux density B and airgap volume Vg. They express to which degree a value of B or Vg belongs
to the set of appropriate values.
The upper boundary of fc(B) is saturation flux density Bsat. Bsat is a hard limit imposed
by the physical properties of magnetic material. However, it is uncertain whether the
flux density right below Bsat (the near saturation area) is appropriate, so a fuzzy
boundary is used.
The upper boundary of the maximum allowable airgap volume Vg of a core is fuzzy
because of imprecise knowledge of the expert.
These examples of physical constraints are rather independent of the application.
Magnetic Components
33
Figure 12.b shows the fuzzy sets fc(), fc(m) and fc(Ploss) that express designer preferences and
application requirements.
The maximum temperature rise is determined by a combination of a fuzzy ambient
temperature amb and the crisp maximum allowable temperature max of the inductor.
The crisp maximum weight mmax is prescribed by the application requirements. However,
the fuzzy preference of the designer is that a lower weight is more preferred.
Figure 13. clarifies that some criterion on inductor weight can be expressed by means of a
fuzzy set. An inductor with a weight of m = 550g, has a judgment or rating of 0.9.
Figure 13.
Criterion, fuzzy set and rating.
The examples have only described how the criteria are set up qualitatively. However, rating
rij will be numerically expressed on a scale from zero to one. The actual judgement expressed
by such a value can be explained by for example a scale of five linguistic expressions
(reference [27]):
Verbal
Rating
Appreciation:
1
0.75
0.5
0.25
0
Figure 14.
Very Good
Good
Fairly Good
Poor
Very Bad
Linguistic scale for the evaluation of the ratings.
34
Magnetic Components
Two examples of judgment are compared, as shown in Figure 15.. An inductor alternative has
a weight of m=750g and a temperature rise of =50C. These attribute values are assessed
by means of criteria fc(m) and fc() imposed in for example an aircraft application:
Figure 15.
Assignment of two attribute ratings to some inductor alternative.
In Figure 16., the respective judgments are written down numerically and verbal. If we would
judge the inductor on only weight and temperature rise, what final rating di would the inductor
have?
ratings
verbal expr.
m = 750g
r = 0.25
Poor
= 50C
r=1
Very Good
final rating:
d = ...
Figure 16.
...
Judgments upon two attributes weight and temp.rise. In

what final rating do they result?.
Magnetic Components
35
In this section has been described how fuzzy criteria cj are modeled as fuzzy sets fc(x). In this
way, each single attribute value x of an alternative is judged, receiving a rating of performance
rij. Now, goal function D has to combine all single ratings into a final rating di. The final
rating di has to approximate the human opinion on alternative ai. Therefore, we derive D by
investigating how a designer comes to a final judgment. Figure 17. gives an overview of the
decision matrix and used parameters:
Figure 17.
Overview of decision matrix.
The next section gives an explanation on criteria aggregation and multi step decision making.
3.4.4 aggregation
In the previous section is shown that the decision criteria can be modeled by means of fuzzy
sets, taking into account subjective factors like human opinion or imprecise information. These
criteria assign an individual rate of suitability or preference to the attributes. To come to a
useful final judgment of an alternative, its attribute ratings have to be combined in such a way
that final rating di will be equal to the judgement of a human decision maker. This is the
actual decision making, performed by means of goal function D.
36
Magnetic Components
Goal function D aggregates the fuzzy criteria into a so called fuzzy decision in the
multidimensional space of attributes (see [1]). In this continuous space, a discrete alternative
results in one crisp final rating di. Hence, criteria aggregation D can be viewed as a matter of
aggregating fuzzy sets by means of fuzzy set-theoretic operations. Figure 18. illustrates criteria
fc(m) and fc() that are aggregated by means of the example goal function
D = min[fc(m),fc()]. An alternative with weight m=450g and =50C obtains a final rating
di=min[0.5, 1]=0.5.
Figure 18.
Example of final rating di of alternative ai by aggregation of criteria f(m)

and f().
In this example we have chosen the minimum function as goal function. However, the
problem of which aggregation operator to use has not yet been considered. Since long, many
different descriptions have been defined of operators that might correspond with latent human
aggregation. Some overviews and ideas can be found in references [35] (pp.23-43), [7] (pp.7398), [22], [18], [20], [21] or [19]. Why would we do so much effort to try to model a human
decision? The advantage of finding the right operator is that the resulting final ratings will
approximate a realistic judgment of the designer. This makes the artificial decision process
more reliable and efficient.
Three basic classes of aggregation operators can be distinguished: operators expressing the
intersection of fuzzy sets (conjunction, t-norms), the union of fuzzy sets (disjunction, tconorms) and the class of averaging operators, which operate between intersection and union.
An infinite number of possible definitions for union, intersection or average can be chosen.
To illustrate this, Figure 19. shows the respective areas where the outcomes of the aggregation
between f() and f(m) are located. Note that, because alternative ai is crisp, an aggegation
operator combines crisp ratings rij. The concept, however, is one of fuzzy latent aggregation.
Magnetic Components
37
Table II. shows some

numerical results of two
inductor alternatives a1 and
a2 that are assessed on
weight and cost. We
assume that these two
attributes have equal importance.
Figure 19.
Mapping of t-norms, t-conorms and averaging operators that

aggregate two criteria.
The operator might correspond with a human connective if the values of the final ratings
r{0 1.0} equal the human judgment:
final rating
with t-norm
final rating
with t-conorm
final rating
with average
rating
weight
rating
cost
min
product
max
algebr.
sum
geom.
mean
arith.
mean
induct
or a1
0.3
0.7
0.30
0.21
0.70
0.79
0.46
0.50
induct
or a2
0.5
0.5
0.50
0.25
0.50
0.75
0.50
0.50
Table II.
Example of the aggregation with t-norms, t-conorms and compensatory operators.
Using a single t-norm or t-conorm as decision operator implies that there is respectively full
compensation or no compensation when ratings are compared. This is shown in Table II.
where the final ratings resulting from t-norms are very low (bold), while those from t-conorms
are very high (underlined). In human decision making, however, there is usually a trade-off
between criteria. In that case, aggregation performed by the human mind shows compensatory
behaviour [36]. Compensatory operators can be based on a combination of t-norms and tconorms or can be not based on these norms, like averaging operators. The result of the
averaging operator is shown in Table II. on the right hand side. Criteria can have unequal
importance. The aggregation operator should take these importance into account by means of
some parameter wj.
38
Magnetic Components
A way to observe a whole range of operators is to introduce an extra parameter in the

operator. Two examples of parametric operators with unequally weighted criteria are:
From Zimmerman and Zysno [36]:
x
D1()
wj
rij )(1
i 1
with
(1 rij) )
wj
(
i 1
(3)
x
[0,1]
and
wj
j 1
=0 : product operator
=1 : algebraic sum
rij and wj are the ratings and the respective importances. x is the number of attributes. can
be interpreted as a grade of compensation. As increases from zero to one, the operator
changes from non-compensatory to full compensatory.
Another parametric operator is from van Nauta Lemke [22] [17] [18]:
x
s
D2(s)
wjrij
1/s
j 1
with
s /{0}
and
wj
1.
(4)
j 1
x
Also
D2(0)
wj
rij
j 1
This averaging operator unifies many commonly used operators:

s-
: minimum operator,
s=-1
: harmonic mean,
s0
: geometric mean,
s=1
: arithmetic mean,
s=2
: quadratic mean,
s
: maximum operator.
Parameter s can be interpreted as an index of optimism. As s increases from minus infinity
to plus infinity, larger membership values will have more and more effect on the final rating
of the aggregation operator. Neutral operators are the geometric and arithmetic mean.
3.4.5 decision tree
A means to get ideas about which operators and importances to choose, is to draw up a
decision tree, that shows the decision hierarchies. Attributes that play a similar role in the
decision process are grouped. When necessary, it is allowed to put the same attribute in more
than one group. The attributes within groups are mutually traded-off against each other,
resulting in a sub-decision that must correspond to the judgment a human designer would pass
on that group. Then, the ratings of the various groups are assigned. Because a human decision
Magnetic Components
39
maker often decides with the help of groups and hierarchies, the aggregation operators and
importances can be found in an intuitive way from this decision tree. An example of a
decision tree for an inductor in an airplane application is given in Figure 20..
Figure 20.
example of a decision tree: tree for an AC-inductor in an aircraft

application.
Such a hierarchical structure provides a better insight in the trade-offs between attributes,
because of the following features:
comparable attributes can be put together,
different operators can be used for different steps,
the importances and aggregation operators can be found more easily, because the
tree resembles the way humans decide
In this chapter we have seen what magnetic component design is, how it is done traditionally,
and we have introduced a way to make decisions by judging the alternatives by means of
fuzzy criteria and aggregation operators. In the next chapter, a system is set up that performs
the necessary calculations and fuzzy ranking by means of fuzzy MADM in order to determine
a preferred set of component alternatives.
40
DSS for AC-inductor Design
41
4. DSS FOR AC-INDUCTOR DESIGN
During the last three decades, computers have been used to an increasing degree to support
human decision making in different ways. Nowadays, these Decision Support Systems are
widely used throughout many different industries. Some examples of DSSs in various
applications are [37], [38] and [39]. The advantage of a Decision Support System (DSS) is
that it couples the computers number-crunching and memory capability with human common
sense and subjective judgment. Therefore, it is expected that a DSS makes the search for the
optimal component more efficient and effective than with the traditional human design
methods.
The DSS proposed in this thesis will assist a designer of magnetic components by selecting
a set of appropriate component alternatives and ranking them depending on how well they
satisfy the criteria. The DSS cannot replace the human designer, because the latter uses
irreplaceable subjective and context sensitive decision criteria. The final decision will therefore
be a trade-off between computer suggestions and human subjective judgment. To improve the
quality of this final decision, we can also implement some user interaction in the DSS during
the selection and ranking process.
To create the DSS, firstly the information that is necessary to design a component is determined. Then a DSS structure is proposed for the example of an AC-inductor.
4.1. Design information

To construct the DSS, several kinds of information have to be retrieved, such as the design
criteria and expert knowledge like assumptions, equations and rules. A lot of this information
can be retrieved by interviewing an expert. However, because the approach of the computer
design procedure is very different from the experts way, not all information can be obtained
at once. Therefore, there is a need for a continuing personal working relationship with the
expert during the construction of the DSS.
This section defines the criteria and expert knowledge necessary to construct the DSS. The
typical example of the design of an AC-inductor used in an aircraft is continued.
4.1.1 design criteria
Most of the criteria (objectives and constraints) contain vague, imprecise or uncertain
boundaries. For simplicity, these fuzzy criteria will be modeled by means of membership
degrees fc(x). The trapezoidal fuzzy sets expressing the criteria have outer boundaries f(cmax)
and f(xmin) dictated by the hard limiting constraints and crisp specifications. As already
mentioned, the fuzziness near these outer boundaries may be caused by various types of
uncertainty. The meaning of the shoulder values f(xmaxs) and f(xmins) of the trapezoidal fuzzy
set is to represent some point between where the information is supposed to be precisely
known or correct and where the information is uncertain or vague.
42
As we have seen in section 3.2, the criteria (objectives and constraints) can be split in physical
constraints, application specifications and designer preferences. We will describe the fuzzy
criteria respectively.
1. Physical constraints
The physical constraints are the physical limits of the alternatives. In our example of the ACinductor, the limits are the maximum of airgap volume Vg, the maximum of flux density B
and the maximum of temperature rise . Some numerical examples are given that are valid
for the core E55/28/21 with ferrite grade 3C80. Also, L=4mH and L=4A.
a. Airgap volume fc(Vg)
The upper boundary of the airgap volume Vg depends on the geometry of the core. Therefore,
each core has its own specific upper limit on airgap volume.
The maximum airgap volume Vgmax is caused by cross-over of magnetic flux as explained
in A.3.3. The core parameters Ac, Awi and wi, explained in appendix A, Figure 43.,
describe the upper limit in equation (A.24):
2
Vgmax
wi
Ac
5Awi Ac
The shoulder value Vgmaxs is determined by a rule-of-thumb of the expert (section A.3.3,
Figure 42.):
Vgmaxs=0.2Acw
The physical lower boundaries Vgmin and Vgmins are determined by the maximum flux
density B max.
The resulting criterion f(Vg) for core E55/28/21 is shown in Figure 22.a
b. Flux density excitation fc( B )
-
The upper boundary B max of the flux density

in the core material is the saturation flux
density Bsat. A flux density higher than this
maximum is not possible.
Flux densities in a near saturation state are

not very appropriate and involve strong nonlinear behaviour as can be seen in Figure 21.
As shoulder value Bmaxs of the fuzzy criterion will chosen the shoulder value Bbend of
the BH-loop. Below Bbend the core material
is in normal operational state. The fuzzy
upper boundary of fc( B ) is shown in
Figure 22.c
Figure 21.
Saturation flux density Bsat and bending point.
43
The lower limits B mins and B min are not determined by material properties, but by the
amount of energy that can be stored in the airgap Vg. Because there exists a fuzzy upper
airgap boundary Vgmaxs and Vgmax, the lower fuzzy boundary of f( B ) can be calculated and
is shown in Figure 22.b. for core material 3C80. Equation i. is equation (A.46)):
B min
oLL2
Vgmax
, and
B mins
oLL2
Vgmaxs
The physical constraints f(Vg) and f( B ) that have just been described are fuzzy boundaries
depending on respectively core geometry and core material. These boundaries can be combined into one unique membership function f(N). f(N) expresses the appropriateness of the
physical state of the component when a certain number of turns is used on a certain core. The
advantage of this function is that N is a visible attribute of a component alternative, and
directly depends on the hidden attributes f(Vg) and f( B ). Figure 22. shows how f(N) is derived.
Figure 22.
Fuzzy criteria f(Vg) and f(B) combined into membership function of physical appropriateness f(N).
f(Vg) and f( B ) are aggregated into f(B) by means of the minimum operator (Figure 22.d.). This
means that the judgement on physical appropriateness is always based on the attribute that
scores worst. The rating of the worst attribute cannot be compensated by a better rating of the
other. Also, the aggregation presupposes that the criteria have equal importance. After the
aggregation, the resulting f( B ) is calculated into f(N) by means of equation ii., which is
(A.45). Note that N can only adopt a discrete number of turns.
44
c. Temperature rise
An exact estimation of the temperature rise of a component needs extensive calculations.
For practical situations, more simple equations like equation (A.39) can be used:
Ptot
coolAcool
In this case, is the temperature rise at the surface of the component.

-
The maximum allowable temperature rise max of the component is found using the
maximum temperature rise at the hot spot: (A.40)
max
max :
amb :
hot :
max amb hot
crisp maximum allowable temperature of the component. max is determined

by the component materials: curie for ferrite, or some max of wire insulation
or coil former (typical value: 125C).
ambient/environment temperature.
extra temperature rise at the hot spot of the component compared to the
temperature rise at the surface of the core
However, more a lower temperature than the

maximum is appreciated.
To determine maxs, we use the uncertainty of the

temperature rise at the hot spot hot inside the
component. We take for ambient temperature amb
its crisp worst case value. If hotmin<hot<hotmax,
then:
max
max amb hot,max
maxs
max amb 2hot,max hot,min

(9)
For a reliable inductor, a high value for hotmin should be adopted.

-
The lower boundary of the temperature rise is not constrained by any physical
consideration. Nevertheless, it may exist because of some preference of the designer.
Upto here, the physical constraints that a component has to satisfy are described. The second
type of limit are the specifications imposed by the application.
45
2) Specifications
The component specifications are the constraints imposed by the application. Some examples
have already been mentioned in section 2.3.
The filter
uo
io
*s
fp
R
shown in appendix B has the following specifications:

= 100sin(t)V : output voltage
= 4sin(t)A
: output current
= 100V
: input pulse peak voltage
= 20kHz
: pulse frequency
= 20 ohm
: load resistance
Appendix
L
L
(C
B describes that these values may result in the following electrical specifications:
= 4mH
: inductance
= 4A
: inductor peak current
= 40F
: capacitance)
These specifications are provided as exact (crisp) values, hereby forming strict limiting boundaries. However, this assumption does not always make sense, because in practice specifications
have a range of tolerance. For example, as we can see in appendix B, there exists a substantial
range of tolerance around inductance L=4mH of the AC-inductor, because L is a chosen value
we can control. If such a range of L would be allowed, then the set of suitable alternatives
may be larger than the case when only a single value for L is allowed. This means that the
unjustly crisp specification of L might obstruct the finding of a real optimal component. This
is also the case for other crisp specifications, like the inductor current. Nevertheless, L and L
are assumed crisp values in this thesis for simplicity, but fuzziness of these parameters is a
recommendation for further research.
If the DC-AC inverter will be used for some airplane application, the following crisp upper
boundaries specifications that determine fc(Cmax) can chosen:
m
< 600g
: total weight
V
< 140cm3 : total size
K
< .80,- : total cost
Ptot < 20W
: total power losses
amb = 50C
: ambient temperature during operation
3) Designer preferences
Although the designer has to take the above-mentioned limitations into account, he usually has
some personal preferences about the above mentioned properties of the component. The preferences of the designer depend on aspects such as knowledge and experience, application
context and other human insights.
46
Figure 25. shows typical fuzzy sets that reflect some abitrary preferences of designer of an
AC-inductor:
Figure 25.
Designer preferences, the specifications taken into account.
We conclude that the trade-offs that are made between the physical constraints, specifications
and preferences are usually trade offs-between soft criteria.
4.1.2 additional expert knowledge

Besides the preferences and knowledge included in the decision criteria, additional expert
information is retrieved in order to realize a more efficient decision procedure. The expert
information may consist of rules, procedures, assumptions or any other kind of applicable
knowledge.
For the design of an ac-inductor, the following information is retrieved during the construction
of the decision procedure:
a.
The equations and assumptions expressing the relations between the component parameters.
Example: We assume that the energy stored in the inductor is negligible, except for the
energy stored in the airgap. We assume that the cooling factor cool is equal for all
component alternatives.
Many approximations have been made in the equations to reduce the complexity of the design
problem. Hence, there is no guarantee that the attributes of the component alternatives will
take the calculated values if constructed in practice. Human design experts cope with this
47
problem, too. Because the DSS proposes a whole set of preferred alternatives, the designer
will have numerous possibilities available for assessment. Without the DSS, he would have
to pass the iterative design procedure several times to find more than one possible alternative.
b.
Heuristic information and the rules of thumb.
Example:
-
Typical heuristic information is the knowledge about the general multi step character of
the decision structure and the sequence of decision steps. The first decision steps distinguish the set of possible alternatives using the limiting boundaries. The most efficient
sequence of the steps is found to be:
1. core selection
2. calculation of the range of number of turns for each core
3. wire selection for each core
4. determination of the inappropriate numbers of turns.
As described in section 4.1.1, a shoulder value for a membership function f(Vgmaxs) is

defined by means of a rule-of-thumb of the expert.
More applicable knowledge is thinkable, such as the information that round wires are
easier to wind and therefor simplify the assembly of an alternative, while they are also
less costly.
Not all expert knowledge is useful for implementation in the DSS. Some rules-of-thumb are
used by a human designer to reduce the number of calculations. For computer implementation,
these simplifications only reduce the set of possible alternatives unjustly. Examples are:
The expert states that temperature rise should not be too low because a low temperature
during operation is caused by a large core. This relationship between temperature rise
and volume is taken into account in MADM, because all attributes are traded off against
each other anyway.
The expert also states that thewinding area of the core should be completely filled with
wire in order to get the most efficient inductor. Because a computer has much
computation power, we can calculate the efficiency for all alternatives. It might be the
case that some alternative does not have a filled window area, but is still better than
some other alternative.
We now have defined the information necessary to rank alternatives by means of MADM and
the information for how to perform the ranking. In the following section, section 4.2, the
structure of the DSS will be set up.
48
4.2. DSS structure

In this section, a structure for a DSS is proposed that selects and ranks the alternatives for an
AC-inductor. The DSS is structured in such a way that the calculation effort is reasonably
small, while no alternatives are rejected unjustly. Therefore, the decisions are taken in a
hierarchical manner. At each level of the hierarchy, a number of alternatives is rejected, which
are not within the set of feasible alternatives. The initial set of alternatives is the set of all
possible combinations of cores, wires and number of turns. Figure 26. gives a basic illustration
of the steps: steps 1. and 2. distinguish the (groups of) feasible alternatives. Step 3. is a
ranking step.
Figure 26.
Structure of Decision Support System that leads to efficient

and effective decision making
A detailed explanation of the steps is given in the following sections:
49
4.2.1 Initial selection

The initial selection determines the set of useful inductor alternatives ai. The totally
inappropriate alternatives are rejected. This means that the component elements or the
complete inductor alternatives that have attributes that lie outside the (crisp) outer boundaries
of the criteria will be rejected. The outcome of the initial selection is a set of inductor
alternatives that satisfies the criteria to some degree. Figure 27. illustrates the selections and
rejections:
Figure 27.
Initial selection cores, wires and number of turns. The set of possible alternatives results,
but no rating have been assigned yet.
As first step, not shown in Figure 27., physical constraints f( B ) and f(N) are calculated for
each core by means of L and L. The respective maxima and minima of B max and Nmax are used
as outer boundaries. The following three rejection steps are performed, resulting in a set of
possible alternatives:
1) core preliminary rejected if:
-
the core cannot store the required maximum energy when the maximum values B max and
Vgmax are used,
the minimum core losses caused by B min produce a temperature rise that is too high,
the volume, weight, or cost or minimum core losses of only the core are already too
high.
50
2)
-
applied for a certain core of the remaining set, a wire is rejected if:
the minimum wire losses caused by Nmin added to the minimum core losses caused by
B min produce a temperature rise that is too high,
the wire does not fit in the former when the minimum number of turns Nmin is applied.
3)
-
A provisional range of N is determined for each remaining core/wire combination {xi,yj}.

Rejected are the combinations of {xi,yj,N} (i.e. the inductor alternatives) that do not
satisfy one or more of the outer limits of the criteria on weight, cost, core losses and
temperature rise.
The possible inductor alternatives ai remain. Up to now, only the hard limiting boundaries of
the criteria are used. To come to a final ranking based on attribute ratings, the fuzzy
boundaries of the criteria have to be known.
4.2.2 removal of dominated alternatives
If the criteria cj are known by means of membership functions fc(x), then all ratings rij of all
possible alternatives ai are known. The second decision step will reject the alternatives that
are dominated by any other alternative. A dominated alternative has all ratings lower than the
ratings of some other alternative. A dominated alternative is irrelevant, because there will
always be another alternative that is better. In each kind of ranking process, these alternatives
always have the lowest ranking places.
If many attributes are used in the decision process, than the computational effort to distinguish
the dominated alternatives might be very high. In that case, it is possible to allow the
dominated alternatives to the final ranking part. If a ranking algorithm is applied, then the set
of dominated alternatives will always be the set of least preferred alternatives.
4.2.3 final ranking
The final ranking determines the order of preference of the remaining alternatives with respect
to the design goal. In section 3.4 we have introduced Fuzzy Multiple Attribute Decision
Making as a means to assign final ratings to the alternatives. The required fuzzy criteria cj
have been set up in section 4.1.1. They result in ratings rij for each attribute value of an
alternative. The attributes are:
f(N) : physical appropriateness
m
: weight
V
: size
K
: cost
Ptot : power loss
: temperature rise
The ratings are combined into a final rating di by some goal function D. The goal function is
defined by one or more aggregation operators and importances wj and can be found by
observing the way a human designer judges an alternative. The alternatives with the highest
ratings form the set of most preferred alternatives.
51
In chapter 5 the results of an AC-inductor in three applications will be described:

1)
airplane application,
2)
locomotive application,
3)
mass product (e.g. car)
In this section, the determination of the final rating is extensively described by means of the
first example of an AC-inductor in an airplane application.
CRITERIA AND IMPORTANCES:
The preferences are chosen
as in Figure 28.
Figure 28.
Criteria imposed on inductor in airplane application.
These criteria do not have equal importance. The designer has knowledge about the
importance, expressed by the following statements:
1)
The most important aspects are the weight m and the size V of the inductor. m is more
important than V, because especially m is an extremely expensive aspect in an aircraft.
2)
Reliability is also an important aspect. Reliability is connected with the temperature
rise and with physical appropriateness f(N). However, these attributes are not very
strong indicators of reliability and are therefore less important than m and V.
3)
The operational cost caused by the power loss Ptot is much more important than the
material and production cost K of the component
4)
The operational cost of the component (Ptot) and the cost of material and production (K)
are less important than the other attributes.
52
DECISION TREE:
The importances can be assigned intuitively from the statements described before. Later in this
section, some other method is used to verify these importances. The decision tree of
Figure 29. can be set up:
Figure 29.
Decision tree of AC-inductor in aircraft application.
CHOICE OF OPERATOR:
It is very difficult to retrieve the operators I...IV of Figure 29. from a human decision maker,
because he often cannot explain the way he aggregates two or more attributes. Also, a very
precise identification may be considered of little use, because we only need to realize certain
properties of an operator. Therefore, operators that emperically give adequate final ratings (i.e.
ratings that are comparable with human judgment) will suffice for this thesis.
Operators I, II and III judge the attributes that play similar roles in the decision problem.
When considering one group, a decider in magnetic component design wants to make some
neutral compensatory trade-off between attributes. In that case, an averaging operator like
the weighted mean seems a natural choice. The difference between harmonic, geometric or
arithmetic mean can be explained by the interpretation of parameter s of equation (4) (section
3.4.4). Parameter s expresses the grade of optimism.
53
Some arbitrary numerical results of the different averaging operators are shown to determine
which is the most appropriate one:
ratings
r1
r2
s=-1
harm.
s0
geom.
s=1
arithm. mean
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
0
0.18
0.32
0.42
0
0.30
0.40
0.46
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.2
0.3
0.7
0.6
0.31
0.40
0.37
0.42
0.45
0.45
0.3
0.4
0.8
0.7
0.44
0.51
0.49
0.53
0.55
0.55
In our case, the harmonic mean (s=-1) is too pessimistic because the assigned final ratings are
lower than a human decider would conclude. The arithmic mean (s=1) is too optimistic
because the assigned final ratings are too high. Hence, the operator that must be closest to the
human way is the weighted geometric mean (s0) for operator I, II and III.
Operator IV aggregates the group ratings generated by I,II and III (Figure 29.). The roles of
the groups are the following:
I
II
III
: size
: reliability
: cost
The first question is: do the groups compensate each other? This question can be posed as:
is a rating of one group able to influence the final rating positively as well as negatively? The
answer is yes, but each group will have a certain importance as shown in Figure 29.
The type of compensation is difficult to discover intuitively. We again choose the weighted
geometric mean (see equation (4)):
x
D2
wj
rij
j 1
54
VERIFICATION OF IMPORTANCES:
The decision tree can be reduced to one equation. The goal function D with importances wj
of this equation can be calculated as follows:
(11)
where the exponentials are the importances wj of the geometric mean. These intuitively chosen
importances of Figure 29. can be verified by using importance determination methods like the
method of Saaty (reference [27]) or an elementary scale shifting (reference [23]). In the latter
one, the designer assigns marks of importance on a scale from 1 to 7. Then, the ratios are
reduced linearly to a scale from 0 to 1:
Marks assigned by designer:
f(N) m
V
K
P
5
7
6
2
3
Calculated importances wj:

f(N) m
V
K
P
0.18 0.26 0.22 0.06 0.10 0.18

We find that these importances approximately agree with those of (11). These importances
from the scale shifting method will be used to calculate the results in chapter 5. We assume
that the proposed importances are sufficiently correct. Of course, better estimations can be
obtained by using user interactive methods to assign the importances.
With the determination of the operator and the importances, we now can write down goal
function D and calculate the final ratings. the final ranking is known, and the designers
attention can be focused on a group of satisfactory design alternatives that are found at the
highest ranking places. The designer will make a final decision on this set by using his human
subjectivity and other context sensitive criteria. In the end, the determination of the best alternative has been a trade-off between the suggestions of the decision support system and the
preferences of the designer.
55
56
Results
5. RESULTS
In this chapter, the results of an AC-inductor in three applications will be described:
1)
airplane application,
2)
locomotive application,
3)
mass product (e.g. car)
For each application the criteria will be shown, as well as the decision tree. Then, the
importances of the criteria will be calculated and verified. Finally, the results of a computer
program written in Matlab will be shown. The used sets of cores and wires are given in
Appendix C.
5.1. Airplane application

CRITERIA (identical to Figure 28.)
Figure 30.
Designer preferences, the specifications taken into

account.
DECISION TREE(identical to Figure 29.)
Figure 31.
Decision tree of AC-inductor in aircraft application.
Results
57
PRELIMINARY SELECTION
Available cores and wires (appendix C):
available:
26 cores (E-,EC-,PM-,U-cores)
36 wires (round, square, Litze)
results in:
936 combinations of core and wire, with for each combination:
77 numbers of turns on average
total number of alternatives
72000 alternatives to start with (approximately)
Core selection
rejected:
12 cores
(24000 alternative rejected)
cause:
- cannot store energy
- weight too high
- temperature rise too high
- power losses too high
- cost too high
- volume too high
core number
1,2,4
25,26
6,8,12,20
8,12,20
22,23,24,25,26
22,23,24,25,26
remaining:
14 cores
48000 alternatives remaining
Wire selection:
rejected:
490 wire combinations
(47500 alternatives rejected)
cause:
- not fitting in former,
- total temperature rise too high,
- m,V,K,P not appropriate.
8 cores were cancelled because no appropriate wire could be found:
core number 3,5,7,10,14,16,17,21
remaining:
491 alternatives
Removal dominated alternatives:
2 alternatives removed
Remaining to be ranked:
489 alternatives of the 72000 we started with (6 cores, 17 core/wire combinations).
58
Results
RANKING RESULTS
An alternative is a specific core/wire/N combination. For each alternative attribute values
are available of physical appropriateness f(N), weight m, size V, cost K, power loss P and
temperature rise with their respective ratings and the final rating.
The importances wj were calculated as:
f(N) m
V
K
P
0.18 0.26 0.22 0.06 0.10 0.18

Ranking operator:
Number of alternatives:
Geometric mean.
489 (17 core/wire combinations)
The matrix with all 489 ranked alternatives and attribute values is available as follows:
core
wire
turns
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
16
16
16
16
16
16
16
16
16
16
16
16
185
186
187
188
189
184
190
191
192
183
193
194
f(N)
m
[kg]
V
[cm3]
K
[Hfl.]
P
[W]
[C]
final
rating
0.846
0.836
0.820
0.803
0.787
0.821
0.771
0.754
0.738
0.795
0.721
0.705
0.4600
0.4611
0.4622
0.4634
0.4645
0.4589
0.4656
0.4667
0.4678
0.4578
0.4689
0.4700
81.14
81.14
81.14
81.14
81.14
81.14
81.14
81.14
81.14
81.14
81.14
81.14
31.15
31.18
31.20
31.23
31.26
31.12
31.29
31.32
31.35
31.09
31.37
31.40
13.21
13.11
13.01
12.91
12.81
13.31
12.72
12.63
12.53
13.42
12.45
12.36
45.5200
45.1676
44.8220
44.4832
44.1509
45.8794
43.8251
43.5056
43.1922
46.2461
42.8848
42.5834
0.6540
0.6538
0.6527
0.6514
0.6500
0.6489
0.6485
0.6468
0.6450
0.6438
0.6431
0.6410
..etc.
and a matrix with the respective ratings of these attributes.
...etc.
f(N)
f(m)
f(V)
f(K)
f(P)
f()
final
0.846
0.836
0.820
0.803
0.787
0.821
0.771
0.754
0.738
0.795
0.721
0.705
0.4666
0.4629
0.4592
0.4555
0.4518
0.4703
0.4481
0.4443
0.4406
0.4740
0.4369
0.4332
0.6541
0.6541
0.6541
0.6541
0.6541
0.6541
0.6541
0.6541
0.6541
0.6541
0.6541
0.6541
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
0.6790
0.6892
0.6993
0.7091
0.7187
0.6686
0.7282
0.7375
0.7466
0.6579
0.7555
0.7642
0.6994
0.7095
0.7194
0.7291
0.7385
0.6892
0.7479
0.7570
0.7659
0.6787
0.7747
0.7833
0.6540
0.6538
0.6527
0.6514
0.6500
0.6489
0.6485
0.6468
0.6450
0.6438
0.6431
0.6410
Results
59
However, a designer is especially interested in the different core/wire combinations and

some suggestions for the number of turns. Therefore, we represent the results as corenumber, wirenumber and only the number of turns at the place where the core/wire combination
appears for the first time.
The core/wire combinations with ranking place 1 to 8 are:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
...
core
9
9
13
9
15
9
9
15
wire
16
9
16
14
16
18
19
14
1stN
185
196
137
195
132
178
179
150
attribute values:
f(N)
m
1
0.8462
0.4600
2
0.6721
0.3123
3
0.6800
0.4586
4
0.6885
0.3937
5
0.5158
0.4637
6
0.6667
0.5360
7
0.6923
0.5616
8
0.3263
0.4143
...
ratings:
f(N)
1
0.8462
2
0.6721
3
0.6800
4
0.6885
5
0.5158
6
0.6667
7
0.6923
8
0.3263
f(m)
0.4666
0.9589
0.4712
0.6878
0.4542
0.2135
0.1280
0.6191
first
appearance
1
19
62
70
105
147
193
199
V
81.1350
81.1350
78.6740
81.1350
86.5830
81.1350
81.1350
86.5830
K
31.1504
31.0803
35.9662
29.7440
37.5936
33.1770
41.6374
36.6000
P
13.2099
16.5517
13.3637
16.8831
12.9963
13.0481
12.6944
15.3595
45.5200
57.0355
56.1310
58.1775
52.3917
44.9625
43.7436
61.9183
final
rating
0.6540
0.6306
0.5729
0.5653
0.5497
0.5145
0.4597
0.4577
f(V)
0.6541
0.6541
0.6814
0.6541
0.5935
0.6541
0.6541
0.5935
f(K)
1.0000
1.0000
1.0000
0.9915
1.0000
1.0000
1.0000
1.0000
f(P)
0.6790
0.3448
0.6636
0.3117
0.7004
0.6952
0.7306
0.4641
f( )
0.6994
0.3704
0.3963
0.3378
0.5031
0.7154
0.7502
0.2309
final
rating
0.6540
0.6306
0.5729
0.5653
0.5497
0.5145
0.4597
0.4577
...
Suggestions 1,2 and 3:
1) EC70
round wire: Acu=1.227mm2 N=185
2) idem
Litze wire: Acu=0.370mm2
3) E55/28/25
Remark:
N=196
the advantage of the Litze wire for alternative 2 is the low weight m, because
the wire diameter is much smaller.
60
Results
5.2. Locomotive application

CRITERIA:
Figure 32.
Criteria imposed on inductor in locomotive application.
DECISION TREE:
Figure 33.
Decision tree of inductor in locomotive application.
IMPORTANCES:
(12)
Results
61

f(N) m
V
K
P
7
6
2
3
4

f(N) m
V
K
P
0.26 0.22 0.06 0.10 0.14 0.22

Ranking operator:
Geometric mean.
RESULTS
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
...
core
9
19
19
19
9
9
19
18
wire
19
19
18
21
16
18
16
19
1stN
201
137
138
133
207
178
143
146
attribute values:
f(N)
m
1
0.5902
0.5994
2
0.4681
0.7678
3
0.4468
0.7416
4
0.5532
0.8509
5
0.4918
0.4845
6
0.6667
0.5360
7
0.3404
0.6488
8
0.2766
0.7920
...
ratings:
f(N)
1
0.5902
2
0.4681
3
0.4468
4
0.5532
5
0.4918
6
0.6667
7
0.3404
8
0.2766
f(m)
0.9970
1.0000
1.0000
0.7457
0.4226
0.6798
1.0000
1.0000
first
appearance
1
28
32
55
71
91
131
149
V
81.1350
79.0760
79.0760
79.0760
81.1350
81.1350
79.0760
79.0760
K
43.5594
68.7005
58.6940
73.3415
31.7629
33.1770
56.2205
56.9290
P
10.4723
9.7374
9.8985
9.7927
11.3607
13.0481
10.5463
10.4321
36.0867
41.3759
42.0605
41.6110
39.1478
44.9625
44.8132
44.3277
final
rating
0.7997
0.6437
0.6421
0.6164
0.6010
0.5905
0.5436
0.5253
f(V)
1.0000
1.0000
1.0000
1.0000
1.0000
1.0000
1.0000
1.0000
f(K)
0.7055
0.3912
0.5163
0.3332
0.8530
0.8353
0.5472
0.5384
f(P)
0.9528
1.0000
1.0000
1.0000
0.8639
0.6952
0.9454
0.9568
f( )
0.8184
0.5073
0.4670
0.4935
0.6384
0.2963
0.3051
0.3337
final
rating
0.7997
0.6437
0.6421
0.6164
0.6010
0.5905
0.5436
0.5253
...
Suggestions 1,2 and 3:
1) EC70
flat wire: Acu=2.030mm2
N=201
2) E/65/32/27
idem
N=137
3) E/65/32/27
round wire: Acu=1.77mm2
N=138
Remark:
a designer could choose round wire of alternative 3 because it is much easier to

wind.
62
Results
5.3. Mass product application

CRITERIA:
Figure 34.
Criteria imposed on inductor in mass product application

(e.g. cars).
DECISION TREE
Figure 35.
Decision tree of inductor in mass product application.
IMPORTANCES:
(13)
Results
63

f(N) m
V
K
P
4
4
7
7
7

f(N) m
V
K
P
0.10 0.10 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.10

Ranking operator:
Geometric mean.
242
RESULTS:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
...
core wire
9
16
13
16
9
18
9
19
18
16
18
18
11
14
13
19
first
1stN appearance
209
1
137
44
178
46
193
53
143
93
137
121
179
173
125
178
attribute values:
f(N)
m
1
0.4590
0.4867
2
0.6800
0.4586
3
0.6667
0.5360
4
0.7213
0.5857
5
0.3404
0.6488
6
0.4681
0.7391
7
0.0909
0.3709
8
0.9200
0.5397
...
ratings:
f(N)
1
0.4590
2
0.6800
3
0.6667
4
0.7213
5
0.3404
6
0.4681
7
0.0909
8
0.9200
f(m)
1.0000
1.0000
0.9281
0.8287
0.7024
0.5219
1.0000
0.9206
V
81.1350
78.6740
81.1350
81.1350
79.0760
79.0760
64.9110
78.6740
K
31.8186
35.9662
33.1770
42.8605
43.2205
45.6310
34.1528
45.2188
P
11.2280
13.3637
13.0481
11.1797
12.2306
11.7890
14.5975
14.3410
38.6907
56.1310
44.9625
38.5242
51.9701
50.0936
67.2572
60.2359
final
rating
0.5635
0.4950
0.4910
0.4689
0.4192
0.3930
0.3301
0.3205
f(V)
0.2550
0.3620
0.2550
0.2550
0.3445
0.3445
0.9604
0.3620
f(K)
0.6060
0.4678
0.5608
0.2380
0.2260
0.1456
0.5282
0.1594
f(P)
0.7544
0.3273
0.3904
0.7641
0.5539
0.6422
0.0805
0.1318
f( )
1.0000
1.0000
1.0000
1.0000
1.0000
1.0000
0.2988
0.9772
final
rating
0.5635
0.4950
0.4910
0.4689
0.4192
0.3930
0.3301
0.3205
...
Suggestion 1,2 and 3:
1) EC70
2) E55/28/25
idem
3) E70
N=137
64
Results
5.4. Airplane appl. with L=3.5mH, L=4A

CRITERIA
(compare with Figure 28.)
The value of min is changed to

28C because the lowest temperature
rise in the set of available alternatives is 28C. The required decision
tree is identical to Figure 29. The
importances are identical to those in
that section, too.
Ranking operator:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
...
core wire
9
16
9
9
11
16
9
14
13
16
9
18
15
16
9
19
Criteria imposed on inductor in airplane application

with smaller L (L=3.5mH).
Geometric mean.
first
1stN appearance
167
1
174
9
122
68
173
80
125
99
166
142
122
171
166
228
attribute values:
f(N)
m
1
0.9643
0.4400
2
0.8393
0.3058
3
0.9804
0.3802
4
0.8571
0.3779
5
0.7447
0.4412
6
0.9706
0.5169
7
0.5281
0.4498
8
0.9706
0.5393
...
ratings:
f(N)
1
0.9643
2
0.8393
3
0.9804
4
0.8571
5
0.7447
6
0.9706
7
0.5281
8
0.9706
Figure 36.
f(m)
0.5334
0.9807
0.7328
0.7403
0.5292
0.2769
0.5006
0.2025
V
81.1350
81.1350
64.9110
81.1350
78.6740
81.1350
86.5830
81.1350
K
30.6493
30.5101
34.1041
29.3216
35.5312
32.6931
37.2456
40.5018
P
12.2538
15.4293
13.2425
15.7396
12.2050
11.4882
11.6721
11.2741
42.2254
53.1679
61.0142
54.2372
51.2643
39.5873
47.0537
38.8494
final
rating
0.6954
0.6887
0.6434
0.6298
0.6230
0.6024
0.5847
0.5591
f(V)
0.6541
0.6541
0.8343
0.6541
0.6814
0.6541
0.5935
0.6541
f(K)
1.0000
1.0000
1.0000
0.9774
1.0000
1.0000
1.0000
1.0000
f(P)
0.7746
0.4571
0.6757
0.4260
0.7795
0.8512
0.8328
0.8726
f( )
0.6613
0.4008
0.2139
0.3753
0.4461
0.7241
0.5463
0.7417
final
rating
0.6954
0.6887
0.6434
0.6298
0.6230
0.6024
0.5847
0.5591
Conclusions and Recommendations
65
6. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
CONCLUSIONS:
The design of magnetic components has been considered in this thesis. In order to
manage the large number of component alternatives and the strong interdependence of
the component attributes, a human designer uses an iterative trial and error design
method to come to the final design. Because of several drawbacks of this method, a
Decision Support System is proposed that assists the designer of magnetic components
with the selection and ranking of the component alternatives. The aim of the DSS is to
select a few possible, good, alternative designs by performing preparatory decisions,
selections and rankings.
-
An example of a DSS for the design of AC-inductors has been described. Expert knowledge is used to set up physical criteria and to improve the speed and the results of the
decision process. The structure of the proposed DSS is multiple step to reduce
calculation effort. The procedure is plain and transparent: 1) initial selection, 2)
removing dominated alternatives and 3) final ranking. All operations, comparisons and
classifications are performed by the system.
The results of the DSS implemented in Matlab show appropriate suggestions of

alternatives regarding the attribute values. If the criteria are defined accurately, then the
geometric mean as compensatory decision operator results in final ratings that agree with
human judgment. Also, a correct assignment of the importances is critial for a correct
final rating.
By means of the DSS, the designer can assess the recommended set of alternatives, and
choose the preferred component using his subjective and context sensitive human
opinion. In this way the quantitative power of computers and qualitative abilities of
humans are used efficiently. The DSS increases the possibility to find a near optimal or
optimal inductor alternative.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
-
For this DSS, the fuzziness often present in specifications like inductance L and current
L should be implemented. This results in a larger set of alternatives to choose from and
probably result in better suggestions of the DSS.
The results of the DSS strongly depend on the correctness of the importnaces. Therefore,
an slightly interactive determination of the importances is advised, using different
methods to check the appropriateness.
The DSS should be constructed for more types of magnetic components, like power
transformers. Like in this research, the conditions and criteria should be investigated
carefully together with an expert. Creating a DSS for another component type will
demonstrate more aspects of automated component design and give more ideas about
the general concept of the DSS.
66
Appendix A: Theory of Magnetic Components
APPENDIX A:
THEORY OF MAGNETIC COMPONENTS
This appendix describes some basic aspects and equations that are important in magnetic
component design. There is few literature that gives an overview on magnetics and magnetic
component design in general. A considerate description of magnetics and magnetic
components is ?, [30]. Other sources of information needed by a component design engineer
can be found in a very scattered variety of books, catalogues and papers, like [13] [28] [15]
[14] [10] or [16].
Emphasis is put on the following aspects of magnetic components:
- Magnetic flux density
B,
- Stored energy
W,
- Airgap length
g,
- Core losses
Pc,
- Window fill factor
- Wire losses
kw,
Pw,
Ptot
,
L,
N
Total power losses

Component temperature rise
Inductance
Number of turns
A.1. Maxwells Equations

Magnetic component theory is mainly based on four equations that are known as the Equations
of Maxwell. A useful insight in the coupling between the electric and the magnetic field is
that the electric and magnetic circuit are analogous to each other:
elec.
circ.
Motive forces
Fields
current/flux:
current-/flux dens.
resistances
:
:
:
:
:
u
E
i
J
Re
magn.
circ.
NI
H
B
Rm
67
The electrical circuit is formed by an electromotive force or voltage u and a copper wire with
resistance Re. These current carrying windings around the magnetic core form the
magnetomotive force NI of the magnetic circuit. The magnetic circuit is formed by the
magnetic core and the airgap with magnetic resistance Rm. The definitions of contours C with
tangents and areas A with normal vectors n are shown in Figure 37.
Figure 37.
Definition of the magnetic and electric contours in the Maxwells equations.
Electromotive force u causes an electric field E that is guided along path Ce by means of
copper wire. The electric field E, in combination with resistance Re, results in current i that
flows in a direction e, causing a current density J. Contour Ce forms the boundary of area Ae,
that also includes the area within the N turns. Therefore, contour Cm pierces area Ce N times.
The current carrying windings, piercing N times through area Am, form the magnetomotive
force (MMF) of the magnetic circuit, indicated by NI. NI causes a magnetic field H along
contour Cm, that is guided by the core of magnetic material and the airgap. This field H in
combination with the magnetic resistance Rm results in magnetic flux through the core and
through the airgap. entails a flux density B with a direction m.
68
For completeness, the four equations of maxwell are given ((A.1) (A.2) (A.3) (A.4)). A good
textbook about magnetic fields is [8].
Cm
H m d
J n dA d D n dA
m
m
A
dt A
(A.1)
d
B ne dA
dt A
(A.2)
Ce
E e d
B nm dA 0
(A.3)
D ne dA ch dV
V
(A.4)
Am
Ae
(A.1) and (A.2) describe the mutual influences or dependencies of the magnetic and electric
quantities. (A.3) and (A.4) say something about independent sources of the magnetic and
electric fields.
In many applications, simplified versions of equations (A.1) and (A.2) are allowed. The
equations that are found are equations (A.5) and (A.6):
From equation (A.1) the relation between magnetic path and mmf:
H
H
N
i
:
:
:
:
(A.5)
Ni
magnetic flux density in core and airgap

magnetic path length of core and airgap
number of turns around core
electrical current through turns
From equation (A.2) the relation between emf and the change in flux density:
u iRe NAc
u
Re
Ac
B
:
:
:
:
dB
dt
(A.6)
source voltage
electrical resistance
average core section area
flux density
In this thesis about magnetic components, we assume that the conditions (?, [30] [16]) are
satisfied necessary to use the equations (A.5) and (A.6).
69
A.2. Core characteristics

A.2.1 BH-loop
The relationship between flux density B and field strength H, is non-linear. This can be
illustrated by the so called BH-curve. If a symmetrical alternating field H is applied to a
magnetic material, a curve is formed as shown in Figure 38..
The shape of the BH-loop depends on the
magnetic material, the excitation amplitude,
the frequency and the DC-offset. Important
are the following definitions:
1.
Bsat is the saturation flux density. A B
higher than this physical maximum is
not possible.
2.
B is the peak excitation of the flux
density, sometimes called Bmax. To
eliminate saturation effects, B is
usually somewhat lower than Bsat.
Figure 38.
Typical BH-curve.
We can distinguish components with and without DC-bias. We define the excitation range B
as shown in Figure 39.a. and b.
a.
b.
Only AC-excitation gives

B=2* B
AC-excitation with DCbias gives B is dependent
on H.
The symmetrically excitated ACinductor plays an important role

in this thesis. Therefore, the
excitation will be indicated by
B . However, we must not forget
that the actual range of
excitation B=2* B .
Figure 39.
Definition of B: a. symmetrically excitated. b. with DCbias.
More information can be read from the relationship between B and H illustrated by the BHcurve.
70
A.2.2 Losses and stored energy

Using (A.6), we can find the instantaneous power p(t) delivered to the electrical and magnetic
circuit during operation of a component.
The right hand side is the instantaneous power pc(t) delivered only to the magnetic circuit:
p (t) i (t)u(t) i (t)2R i (t)NAc
dB (t)
dt
pw(t) pc(t)
(A.7)
pw i 2(t)R
and
pc(t)
H(t)
NAc
dB(t)
dt
Ac
H(t)dB(t)
dt
It takes one period T (=1/f) to complete one BH-loop. The energy supplied to the core after
one period T is lost in the core: Wc,loss
T
Wc,loss
p dt A HdB
c c
c
B
0
Vc HdB
B
(A.8)
From (A.8) and Figure 39.can be found that both the dissipated power as well as the stored
energy are proportional to the respective areas indicated in Figure 39.:
Wc,store
Pc,loss
Vc area I
(A.9)
f Vc area II
A.2.3 Permeability
Permeability expresses the relationship between B and H. Because this relationship is nonlinear, can be defined in different ways depending on magnetic conditions and application.
When magnetic field H is applied to a magnetic material, the resulting flux density B is
composed of that of free space plus the contribution of the aligned domains:
(A.10)
B oH Jp or B o(H M )
where
o
Jp
M
: magnetic constant (410-7 H/m)

: magnetic polarization
: magnetization.
The ratio of B and H is called absolute permeability : this is defined as the product of
magnetic constant o and relative permeability r:
B
M
o(1
) or
H
H
(A.11)
(at each point of the BH-loop)

The next equations describe some other permeabilities. They illustrate that if the magnetic
material is used for another application, other core characteristics can be expected:
71
The following four definitions are absolute permeabilities.5
b. Effective or amplitude permeability

eff
Beff
Heff
or
eff
B
H
(A.12)
(for higher field strengths and flux without presence of a bias field HDC)
c. Impulse permeability
p
B
H
(A.13)
(for pulse shaped excitation)

d. Incremental permeability
B

H H
(A.14)
dc
(if Hac is superimposed on a static bias field Hdc)

e. Reversible permeability
dB
rev
dH H
(A.15)
dc
(if amplitude of Hac is negligibly small compared to Hdc)
A.3. Airgap issues

For many applications we want the magnetic component to store energy. Therefore, the
magnetic circuit is provided with a gap of air or other material with low permeability
(Figure 37.). The effect of an airgap is that the BH-loop of the circuit changes as shown in
Figure 40. The stored energy, proportional to the area between the curve and the B-axis,
increases, while the dissipated energy remains the same.
A.3.1 Equivalent permeability e

To make calculations on gapped circuits easier, the equivalent BH-loop of a gapped core is
described by means of equivalent permeability e. This equivalence compensates for the airgap
by regarding an ungapped core with the same core area Ac, but with equivalent core length
5)
Notify that in data handbooks like [28], [15] and ? definitions (A.12), (A.13),
(A.14) and (A.15) are relative and have been reduced with a factor 1/o.
72
e= g+ c and equivalent permeability e.

Usually g is relatively small, while the
relative permeability r of the core
material is very high. The definitions are
then:
He
c
Hc
Hg g ,
and r o
(A.16)
He Hc Hg
Figure 40.
BH-loop of gapped core compared to ungapped

core.
Hence e can be calculated as:

Be
He
B
He
c
c
(A.17)
(A.17) shows that equivalent permeability e is only determined by the relation between g
and c. Hence, the calculations on a gapped core are not dependent on the core material, but
only on the size and permeability of the gap.
A.3.2 Stored energy
To determine the maximum storable energy in some excitated volume V=A , we consider the
BH-curve as a straight line and find using (A.8):
B
A H dB A
W
c
1
2
(A.18)
H B
B 0
c of a core with a gap is calculated with (A.11) and

The maximum storable energy W
approximation (A.17):
B
A H dB A H dB
W
c
c c
c g
0
2 e
2
B Ac (
B Ac
B Ac
2 o
)
(A.19)
B Vg
2 o
This is an important approximation. The approximation of (A.19) shows that when relative
permeability r is large and the airgap is relatively small, then approximately all energy is
stored in the airgap volume Vg. Hence, one of the benefits of an air gap is that any changes
in the value of the material permeability are strongly reduced in their effect. Also, with this
approximation we do not need to use equivalent permeability e any more.
73
A.3.3 Fringing and cross-over

The function of an inductor is based on
its ability to store energy. The energy can
be stored by introducing an airgap with
airgap volume Vg or length g. Two important side effects of gapping are shown
in Figure 41.: fringing and cross-over.
Fringing
The flux does not cross the airgap
straightly, but bends out into the space
surrounding the airgap volume. The total
gap volume Vg will be larger than Ac g.
This is called fringing and it results in a
higher value of e.
Figure 41.
Fringing and cross-over caused by the airgap
If some application requires an airgap volume Vg, then we can calculate the resulting
airgap length g by means of a compensation. The compensation assumes that the
airgap holds an increased section area.
Figure 42. shows the definition of symbols.
Kusko [11] stated that a suitable gap correction is to assume that the increased section area Ag is obtained by increasing each
dimension of the gap by physical gap length
g:
Figure 42.
Ag (w
) (d
Definition of symbols in the calculations on

fringing
(A.20)
Because very often d>>w, the fringing at the ends of d is neglected:

Ag
(w
(A.21)
)d
This results in the following compensated airgap length g:

Vg
Ag
(w
)d
(w
Ac
w
w
2
w2
4
2
g
g
) Ac
(A.22)
wVg
Ac
74
Cross-over
For relatively large airgap length g, the flux will re-enter into another near part of the core.
Also, the flux will cross the core from the upper to the lower side through the winding area.
In both cases, the flux will also pass through the copper windings. This produces eddy
currents and additional heating. Therefore gap length g has to be kept relatively small. We
will calculate the maximum airgap length g,max by means of the magnetic resistances of a
magnetic circuit.
Figure 43.
Definition of parameters and equivalent magnetic circuit
Figure 43. shows a magnetic component with its equivalent magnetic circuit. We assume that
the core conducts the flux perfectly because r >> 1. Current carrying windings NI are the
source of flux . Two magnetic resistances are connected in parallel:
- Rg of airgap g with area Ac.
- Rwi of window gap wi with area Awi
Equation (A.23) shows the relationship between NI, and Rm:
NI
Rm
(A.23)
With increasing airgap length g, magnetic resistance Rg increases. Because the difference
between Rg and Rwi decreases, the flux will increasingly cross the core window with magnetic
resistance Rwi. The expert states that the amount of flux crossing through Rwi is still negligible
if Rwi>10Rg.
The criterion for
g,max
75
is now calculated as follows:

2
wi
Awio
> 10
Aco
Ac(2
wi
<
) > 10 gAwi
(A.24)
Ac
wi
5Awi Ac
A rule-of-thumb of the expert is available, too. To reduce the losses caused by eddy currents
in the copper windings, according to the expert the maximum gaplength g should be one fifth
of the core width d [Klaassens 1991, page 33,55]:
g<0.2w
The minimum realizable gaplength is approximately:
g>0.1mm
A.4. Wire characteristics

A.4.1 Fill factor
The copper section area of wire is given as Acu. However, more area is occupied by the wire
because of the following requisites:
-
Isolation around the wire and between wire layers,

Unused space because of the wire
geometry,
Unused space because of winding
irregularities.
A basic way to take these aspects into

account is to define wire section area AN.
AN is the complete area that is occupied
by a winding.
Figure 44.
Different wire types and their typical values of

fill factor kw.
Fill factor kw expresses the difference between the copper area Acu and the wire section area
AN.
kw
Acu
AN
(A.25)
76
Some typical values of kw for different wire types are shown in Figure 44. If the available core
winding area Aw is completely filled with wire, then the following equation is valid:
AN
Aw
(A.26)
Designers of magnetic components often use the rule-of-thumb to fill the core window
completely with wire, because it results in a reasonable efficient component. However, it is
not proved that it results in the most appropriate component for each application.
A.4.2 Resistance
The resistances Rdc and Rac of a complete winding are defined as follows:
Rdc
Rac
t
kac
w() N
Acu
Rw,sN
(A.27)
kacRdc
: mean length of a turn

: AC-current coefficient
The AC-current coefficient kac is the important difference between solid wire and Litz-wire.
kac takes the increase of wire resistance into account, caused by the skin effect and the
proximity effect []. kac depends on wire type, wire size and frequency. Litz wire has a very
low value: kac = 1.2. Solid wire takes values from kac = 2...5.
Copper resistivity dependent on temperature :
w() w,20C(1 R( 20C))
(A.28)
R : resistance temperature factor (copper: R = 0.0043K-1)

w,20C = 17 10-9m.
A.5. Power losses and temperature rise

The specific losses of magnetic components are divided into the following groups:
1.
2.
winding losses Pw
core losses Pc existing of:
a. hysteresis losses Ph
b. eddy current losses Pe
c. residual losses
Mind that in the literature and in this thesis all losses are specific losses per cubic meter (m-3)
that use the effective (rms) values of the inducing parameters.
77
1. Winding losses
Winding loss Pw (see (A.27)):
2
Pw
where
Ieff Rac
Ieff kac Rdc
Ieff kac N tRw,s
(A.29)
is the mean length of turn and Rw,s is the specific wire resistance (m-1).
2. Core losses
Core losses Pc (see formula (A.8) and ?) can be split into three components 6.
a.
Hysteresis losses Ph:
Ph vanish for small B, but for higher field strengths (B>0.2 T) an indication of
Ph is (Steinmetz):
Ph
b.
(A.30)
kh f (B) m
Hysteresis coefficient kh and factor m depend on frequency and core material

(m = 1...3).
Eddy current losses Pe: they are negligible at very low frequency. At higher
frequencies ( f>10 kHz) we can use the equation:
Pe
(A.31)
ke f 2 (B)2
Residual losses Pr caused by inhomogeneous parts of the construction of the component are
neglected.
Total core losses
Usually only total core loss Pc is relevant. The equation describing Pc is:
Pc
Ph Pe
kh f B m ke f 2B2
(A.32)
[28] shows that this results in one equation for Pc that is proportional to f and B in the
following way (a and b are parameters that have values between zero and one in practice.) :
Pc ( f ) f (1
x)
Pc ( B ) B(2
y)
(A.33)
0x1
0y1
6)
The IEC-norms for the magnetic losses are represented with the use of equivalent
resistance Re or tan (= Re/L). However, because the signals do not have the
shape of a sine wave, it is often difficult to determine . Therefore we will not
use these representations.
78
In most cases, core manufacturers provide

their core material specifications by means
of a figure as shown in Figure 45.: Pc( B )
with frequency f as parameter. Therefore, it
is convenient when frequency f is predetermined, so power loss function (A.34) can be
used:
kc B n
Pc
(A.34)
These graphs can easily be replaced by

power function (A.34) if we read kc and n
from the graph in the following way: we
pick two points and read Pc1, Pc2, B 1 and B 2.
Figure 45.
Specific power loss Pc as function of peak

flux density B with frequency f as parameter.
Then from Figure 45.:

Pc1
Pc2
kcB 1
(A.35)
kcB 2
n and then kc can be found easily:
kc
Pc2
n
B 2
Pc1
Pc2
n
B 2
log
n
B 1 n
log
Pc1
Pc2
B 1
(A.36)
B 2
Optimal value of B
Using (A.27) (A.29) and (A.34) we find:
Pc
Pw
kcVc B n
2
Ieff kac
(T) t N 2
kwAw
(A.37)
1
B 2
The logarithmic scale of Figure 46.clearly

shows that total losses Ptot=Pw+Pc reach a
minimum Pmin for some B or B. This flux Figure 46.
density is regarded as optimum excitation
Bopt.
Optimum excitation Bopt causing minimum

total losses Ptot.
79
When a component is symmetrically magnetized, the equations (A.37) give for Bopt:
Pw
2
P
n c
(A.38)
In many cases n=2 (the typical value of n), so we can state that the minimum losses are
reached if: Pw=Pc. ( ?, [30] pp.270). This minimum value Pmin of the core losses always has
provided designers of magnetic components with a rule-of-thumb to determine preferred value
B . However, as we have already mentioned about the rule-of-thumb of the fill factor, it is not
proved that this rule-of thumb results in the most appropriate component for each application.
Temperature rise
In this thesis, calculations on the temperature rise have been simplified. An extensive
explanation on heat transfer and temperature rise can be found in ?, [30] (pp256-264). We
assume that the temperature rise on the surface of the component can be estimated directly
from total loss Ptot:
Ptot
Prad Pconv
rad conv
tot

symbols:
Prad Pconv
rad, conv, tot
cool
Acool
:
:
:
:
cool Acool
(A.39)
Ptot
coolAcool
power carried away by radiation and convection,

respective thermal conductances (WK-1),
cooling factor [Wm-2K-1].
cooling area of component
A typical value of cool = 20 Wm-2K-1, which means that the core is able for each cm2 to
dissipate 2 mW with a temperature rise of 1C.
In practice, the temperature inside the component is somewhat higher, typically 10C, than the
temperature at the surface. Especially at the so called hot spot inside a component. At the
hot spot, the temperature can be more than 30C higher than at the surface. The maximum
allowable temperature rise max of the component is determined by the following parameters:
max :
amb :
hot :
maximum allowable temperature of the component (determined by the component

materials, e.g. curie of ferrite, or max of the insulation),
ambient temperature,
extra temperature rise at the hot spot of the component.
The maximum allowable temperature rise caused by the total power losses ((A.39)) is:
(A.40)
max max amb hot
80
A.6. Important equations

In this section, the important characteristic equations are described of the AC-inductor, the
inductor with DC bias and the transformer.
A.6.1 AC-inductor
The variation of B is symmetric around the origin of the BH-curve. Therefore:
B
(A.41)
2 B < 2 Bsat
Seen from the electrical circuit, the inductance L is defined by:

uL
diL
(A.42)
dt
Flux of a coil is defined by:

B n dA
A
NAcB
LiL
(A.43)
(N is the discrete number of turns: N /{0} )

The maximum stored energy Wc in an inductor with inductance L is:
W
c
1
2
(A.44)
L L
Using (A.43), (A.45) shows that B is inversely proportional to N:

1 LL
N Ac
(A.45)
Using the equations (A.44) and (A.19) we find for the energy stored in the airgap:
W
c
1
2
LL
2
B Vg
(A.46)
2o
With (A.45) can be easily found:

L Vg
N2
Ac o
(N discrete)
We can calculate L with (A.5), (A.43) and (A.17):
L
e N 2 Ac
c
(N discrete)
oN 2Ac
g
(A.48)
81
A.6.2 Inductor with DC bias
Figure 47.
BH-loop of inductor with a DC offset: H=Hdc+Hac
The variation of B is symmetric around Hdc of the BH curve. Because of the offset Hdc, the
BH-loop of the inductor core is described by the permeability rev of (A.15). When we only
consider the values of H smaller than Hbend, we assume:
(A.49)
e,rev e
With approximation (A.49) in the same way as (A.48) we can find:
L
e,rev N 2 Ac
e N 2 Ac
o N 2 Ac
(A.50)
Number of turns N
To determine the number of turns N, we want the maximum amount of flux density to be
used. For all applications with a dc component in the current and field, the following
equations are valid.
<Bsat we can find:
For the maximum value B
B
e Hdc
e
N Idc
c
1
2
B
Voltseconds
2 N Ac
(A.51)
82
Using (A.51) and (A.50) we find for N:

N
dc ripple
(LIdc VLT)
AcB
AcB
(A.52)
Like in (A.46) we find:

Wc
1
2
LL
2
B Vg
(A.53)
2o
wire losses Pw become:

Pw
Ieff Rac
Idc Rdc (Ipp) kac Rdc
(A.54)
where Ipp is the ripple current related with H.

Because the excitation range B is very small, we can neglect the core losses Pc.
c. Transformer
The variation of the magnetic inductance is symmetric around the origin of the BH curve.
Therefore the volt-second balance is written as:
Tp
e dt
N Ac
(A.55)
< 2 Bsat
In case of a two-winding transformer the electrical losses are now calculated as the sum of
the losses in the primary and secondary winding:
(A.56)
Pw Pw1 Pw2
Appendix B: AC-inductor Application
83
APPENDIX B: AC-INDUCTOR APPLICATION
In this appendix, the basic equations for the design of an AC inductor are presented. To
explain the equations they will be used in an example: the inductor will operate as filter
inductor of a full-bridge inverter.
B.1. Inverter equations

The full-bridge inverter is an elementary switch mode DC-AC converter. The electrical circuit
is shown in Figure 48.. The four semiconductor switches S (powerFET, IGBT) switch ON and
OFF with pulse frequency fp. Using the three voltage levels +Es, -Es and 0, they create wave
shape es*. L and C make a second order filter that has to reduce the fp fourier component of
es*. In this way uo will have small high frequency components and will approximate a
sinusoidal wave with frequency f. The respective wave shapes and frequency spectra of es*
and uo are shown in Figure 49.
Figure 48.
Figure 49.
Full-bridge power inverter.
Wave shapes and frequency spectra of a full-bridge

power inverter.
84
The following equations can be

derived from [26] (pp.234-242)
and [5] (pp.275-277). The output LC filter is a second order
low pass filter with transfer
function H(j) shown in the
Bode Plot of Figure 50.
Figure 50.
Bodeplot of RLC filter.
Transfer function H(j) is:

G() e j()
H(j)
j
)
n
1
j Q
n
1
j2LC
L
R
(B.1)
Frequency n is the natural filter frequency, also called break frequency. is the damping
ratio.
From (B.1) we can find n and quality factor Q:
n
LC
1
R
L
C
(B.2)
Because we want to filter the frequency component fp out of es*, gain Ges(p) will be multiplied by factor x<1. If we know x, we can obtain a suitable value for the break frequency n.
(B.3) finds an approximation of n using the asymptotes of the bode plot:
if Gu (p)
o
G
dB
12
oct
x Ge (p) , then
s
20logx dB
dB
12
oct
5
3
new natural break frequency : n
logx octave
(B.3)
To assure an absolutely stable filter, quality factor has to be Q<. The reason is that gain
G() will then be monotone decreasing as increases.
Concluding:
We want to reduce the gain for frequency components fp with more than x:
Guo(p) < xGes(p)
and we want the filter to be stable
Q<
85
then we can write (B.2) and (B.3) as:

LC >
1
( p
5
3
logx octave)
L
<
C
1
4
R2
(B.4)
B.2. Design example

Output voltage
Output current
Load resistance
pulse repetition frequency
Inverter output frequency
uo
io
R
fp
f
=
=
=
=
=
100sin(t) V
4sin(t) A
20 ohm
20kHz
50Hz
Using (B.3) we want the gain reduction to be x = 0.01:

GUo(20kHz) < 0.01 GEs(20kHz)
Hence, the maximum break frequency can be found as
x < 0.01
G > 20log(0.01) dB
40 dB
dB
12
oct
>
n < 20kHz
40 dB
(B.5)
3.3 oct
3.3oct
7700 s 1
From (B.2) and (B.4) follows:

L
<
C
LC >
1
4
(20)2
1
(7700s 1)2
1002
1.69 10
(B.6)
choose
choose
C 40F
LC
4 mH so
16 10
(Q 0.5 stable)
8
> 1.69 10
(correct)
Capacitor current ic:

ic
duo
dt
40 10 6 100 2 50 cos(t)
FV
s
1.3 cos(t) A
(B.7)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
no
type
units
EC35(P)-----
EC41(P)-----
EC52(P)-----
E47/20/16(P)
PM50/39(S)--
PM50/39(S)--
E56/24/19(S)
E56/24/19(S)
EC70(P)-----
E55/28/21(P)
E55/28/21(P)
E55/28/21(P)
E55/28/25(P)
E55/28/25(S)
PM62/49(S)--
PM62/49(S)--
E80/38/20(S)
E65/32/27(P)
E65/32/27(P)
E65/32/27(P)
E65/32/27(S)
PM74/59(S)--
PM74/59(S)--
E70/33/32(S)
U93/76/16(P)
U93/52/30(P)
Core Data
3C80
3C80
3C80
3C80
N27
N87
N27
N67
3C80
3C80
3C85
3F3
3C80
N27
N27
N87
N27
3C80
3C85
3F3
N27
N27
N87
N27
3C80
3C80
375
375
375
375
400
375
400
390
375
375
375
350
375
400
400
375
400
375
375
350
400
400
375
400
375
375
mate. Bsat
[mT]
300
300
300
300
385
350
385
355
300
300
325
325
300
385
385
350
385
300
325
325
385
385
350
385
300
300
Bbend
[mT]
2.16
2.16
2.16
2.16
2.10
2.71
2.10
2.55
2.16
2.16
2.38
3.32
2.16
2.10
2.10
2.71
2.10
2.16
2.38
3.32
2.10
2.10
2.71
2.10
2.16
2.16
n
(25kHz)
1.060
1.060
1.060
1.060
2.157
0.201
2.157
0.696
1.060
1.060
0.263
0.154
1.060
2.157
2.157
0.201
2.157
1.060
0.263
0.154
2.157
2.157
0.201
2.157
1.060
1.060
kc
10800E-9
18800E-9
20660E-9
31000E-9
31000E-9
36400E-9
36400E-9
40100E-9
43700E-9
43700E-9
43700E-9
52000E-9
52100E-9
62000E-9
62000E-9
71800E-9
78200E-9
78200E-9
78200E-9
78600E-9
101000E-9
101000E-9
102000E-9
158000E-9
200000E-9
6530E-9
Vc
[m3]
11603E-9
15412E-9
34698E-9
28680E-9
44850E-9
44850E-9
49781E-9
49781E-9
81135E-9
64911E-9
64911E-9
64911E-9
78674E-9
76450E-9
86583E-9
86583E-9
124432E-9
79076E-9
79076E-9
79076E-9
116833E-9
141458E-9
141458E-9
149798E-9
226176E-9
290160E-9
Vtot
[m3]
84E-6
121E-6
180E-6
233E-6
370E-6
370E-6
340E-6
340E-6
279E-6
354E-6
354E-6
354E-6
420E-6
420E-6
570E-6
570E-6
390E-6
532E-6
532E-6
532E-6
535E-6
790E-6
790E-6
683E-6
450E-6
780E-6
Ac
[m2]
138E-6
210E-6
156E-6
154E-6
154E-6
282E-6
282E-6
464E-6
250E-6
250E-6
250E-6
282E-6
282E-6
270E-6
270E-6
810E-6
394E-6
394E-6
394E-6
415E-6
442E-6
442E-6
445E-6
2606E-6
1332E-6
97E-6
Aw
[m2]
0.053
0.062
0.070
0.096
0.097
0.097
0.114
0.114
0.096
0.116
0.116
0.116
0.125
0.125
0.120
0.120
0.158
0.150
0.150
0.150
0.151
0.140
0.140
0.164
0.233
0.224
lt
[m]
38E-3
60E-3
112E-3
106E-3
140E-3
140E-3
184E-3
184E-3
254E-3
216E-3
216E-3
216E-3
260E-3
256E-3
280E-3
280E-3
358E-3
400E-3
400E-3
400E-3
394E-3
460E-3
460E-3
514E-3
800E-3
1120E-3
m
[kg]
3771E-6
4776E-6
7910E-6
6363E-6
7994E-6
7994E-6
9180E-6
9180E-6
14510E-6
10852E-6
10852E-6
10852E-6
11904E-6
11646E-6
12403E-6
12403E-6
18663E-6
11767E-6
11767E-6
11767E-6
15685E-6
17350E-6
17350E-6
18124E-6
36112E-6
31164E-6
Acool
[m2]
106E-9
177E-9
371E-9
340E-9
407E-9
407E-9
612E-9
612E-9
759E-9
659E-9
658E-9
658E-9
806E-9
739E-9
752E-9
752E-9
827E-9
1107E-9
1107E-9
1107E-9
1113E-9
1311E-9
1311E-9
1544E-9
1400E-9
4368E-9
Vgsuit
[m3]
218E-9
351E-9
657E-9
546E-9
1708E-9
1708E-9
1021E-9
1021E-9
1363E-9
1329E-9
1329E-9
1329E-9
1614E-9
1466E-9
3312E-9
3312E-9
1255E-9
2222E-9
2222E-9
2222E-9
2234E-9
5579E-9
5579E-9
2834E-9
3622E-9
3139E-9
Vgmax
[m3]
6.00
6.00
9.00
15
27.00
21.00
25
30
26.00
25
30
30
31
32
33.00
35.00
36
37
50
40
60
108.00
81.00
80
90
100
Kc
[Hfl]
86
Appendix C: Tables
Table III. Data Table of the set of cores used in the design program.
Appendix C: Tables
par
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
REW
FEW
RLW
Acu
[m^2]
0.031E-6
0.039E-6
0.049E-6
0.078E-6
0.126E-6
0.196E-6
0.246E-6
0.250E-6
0.370E-6
0.396E-6
0.500E-6
0.503E-6
0.750E-6
0.785E-6
1.000E-6
1.227E-6
1.500E-6
1.770E-6
2.030E-6
2.500E-6
2.590E-6
3.140E-6
3.290E-6
4.000E-6
4.200E-6
4.910E-6
5.470E-6
6.000E-6
6.840E-6
7.070E-6
8.640E-6
9.620E-6
10.000E-6
12.570E-6
16.000E-6
25.000E-6
87
kw
kac
(20kHz)
0.6
1.4
0.6
1.4
0.6
1.4
0.6
1.4
0.6
1.4
0.6
1.4
0.6
1.4
0.10
1.0
0.16
1.0
0.6
1.4
0.13
1.0
0.6
1.4
0.17
1.0
0.6
1.4
0.19
1.0
0.6
1.4
0.24
1.0
0.68
1.4
0.9
1.4
0.29
1.0
0.9
1.4
0.70
1.4
0.9
1.4
0.30
1.0
0.9
1.4
0.71
1.4
0.9
1.4
0.32
1.0
0.9
1.4
0.72
1.4
0.9
1.4
0.72
1.4
0.37
1.0
0.73
1.4
0.42
1.0
0.41
1.0
mspec
[kg/m]
0.30E-3
0.37E-3
0.47E-3
0.74E-3
1.19E-3
1.86E-3
3.70E-3
2.30E-3
3.10E-3
3.76E-3
4.90E-3
4.77E-3
7.00E-3
7.46E-3
9.60E-3
11.60E-3
14.00E-3
16.50E-3
17.90E-3
22.00E-3
22.60E-3
29.40E-3
29.00E-3
36.00E-3
37.00E-3
45.80E-3
49.00E-3
54.00E-3
60.80E-3
68.00E-3
76.90E-3
90.50E-3
90.00E-3
123.00E-3
144.00E-3
225.00E-3
Solid Round Enamelled Wire

Solid Flat Enamelled Wire
Round Litz Wire
Rspec
K type
[ohm/m] [HFl/m]
23.380
0.01
rew
14.920
0.01
rew
10.000
0.02
rew
4.240
0.03
rew
1.480
0.04
rew
0.570
0.05
rew
0.360
0.07
rew
0.0755
0.22
rlw
0.0500
0.27
rlw
0.140
0.11
rew
0.0371
0.31
rlw
0.090
0.11
rew
0.0248
0.32
rlw
0.037
0.20
rew
0.0185
0.43
rlw
0.015
0.29
rew
0.0127
0.49
rlw
0.0101
0.42
rew
0.0089
0.91
few
0.0076
1.23
rlw
0.0069
1.17
few
0.0057
0.94
rew
0.0055
1.48
few
0.0047
2.06
rlw
0.0043
1.68
few
0.0036
1.18
rew
0.0033
2.19
few
0.0031
5.72
rlw
0.0026
2.50
few
0.0025
1.70
rew
0.0021
2.70
few
0.0019
2.30
rew
0.0018
7.72
rlw
0.0014
3.00
rew
0.0012
12.64 rlw
0.0007
17.32 rlw
88
Appendix D: Symbols
APPENDIX D: SYMBOLS
SYMBOLS
ai .
Ac
Acu
Ag
AN
Aw
B .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
alternative in decision making . . . .

equivalent core area (shape comp.)
copper cross section area of wire . .
air gap area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
total wire section area . . . . . . . . .
available winding area . . . . . . . . .
magnetic flux density . . . . . . . . . .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
m2
m2
m2
m2
m2
T=Wbm-2
B . . peak value of excitation B . . . . . . . . T

B max . maximum allowable B . . . . . . . . . . T
Bsat . .
cj . . .
C ...
di . . .
D(r,w)
De . .
E ...
Es . .
...
f ...
fc(x) .
fp . . .
H ...
He . .
i ...
Is . . .
Io . . .
L . . .
J ...
Jp . . .
kac . .
kc . . .
ke . . .
kh . . .
kw . .
Kc . .
Kmax .
Ktot . .
Kw . .
Kw,s .
c . . .
e . . .
g . . .
t . . .
L ...
N ...
mc . .
saturation flux density . . . . . . . . . . .

criterion/attribute . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
capacitance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
final rating of alternative ai . . . . . . .
goal function/aggregation function . . .
electric displacement . . . . . . . . . . . .
electric field strength . . . . . . . . . . . .
input voltage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
peak voltage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
frequency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
membership function . . . . . . . . . . . .
pulse repetition frequency . . . . . . . . .
magnetic field strength . . . . . . . . . . .
equivalent magn. field (gap compens.)
electrical current . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
average input current . . . . . . . . . . . .
average output current . . . . . . . . . . .
inductor peak current . . . . . . . . . . . .
current density . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
magnetic polarization . . . . . . . . . . . .
AC-current resistance coefficient . . . .
core loss coefficient . . . . . . . . . . . . .
eddy current loss coefficient . . . . . . .
hysteresis loss coefficient . . . . . . . . .
wire fill factor of wire . . . . . . . . . . .
cost of core . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
maximum allowed cost of component
total cost: core cost plus winding cost
total wire cost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
specific wire cost . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
equivalent core length (shape comp.) .
equivalent core length (air gap comp.)
length of air gap . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
mean length of turn . . . . . . . . . . . . .
inductance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
number of turns of a winding . . . . . .
core mass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
T
F
Cm-2
Vm-2
V
V
s-1
s-1
Am-1
Am-1
A
A
A
A
Am-2
Hfl
Hfl
Hfl
Hfl
Hfl.m-1
m
m
m
m
H=JA-2
kg
mw . .
mmax .
mtot . .
M...
Pc . .
Pe . .
Ph . .
Ptot . .
Pr . .
Pw . .
rij . . .
Rac . .
Rdc . .
Re . .
Rm . .
Rth . .
Rw,s . .
T ...
Tp . .
u ...
...
Uo . .
Vc . .
Vg . .
Vg,max
Vmax .
V ...
wj . . .
W...
c . .
W
x ...
y ...
cool .
...
R . .
B . .
H . .
i . .
c . .
w .
tot .
...
...
amb .
c . . .
max .
...
winding mass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
maximum allowed mass of component
total component mass . . . . . . . . . . .
magnetization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
total core losses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
eddy current core losses . . . . . . . . . .
hysteresis core losses . . . . . . . . . . . .
total core losses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
residual core losses . . . . . . . . . . . . .
wire losses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
rating of ai regarding cj . . . . . . . . . .
AC-current resistance . . . . . . . . . . . .
DC-current resistance . . . . . . . . . . . .
electrical resistance . . . . . . . . . . . . .
magnetic resistance . . . . . . . . . . . . .
thermal resistance of a component . . .
specific wire resistance . . . . . . . . . .
period . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
pulse repetition period . . . . . . . . . . .
voltage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
peak voltage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
output voltage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Equivalent core volume (shape comp.)
Airgap volume . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
maximum allowed airgap volume . . .
Maximum allowed size . . . . . . . . . .
Size of the component . . . . . . . . . . .
importance of criterion cj . . . . . . . . .
Energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Maximum stored energy in magn. circ.
locally used arbitrary parameter . . . .
locally used arbitrary parameter . . . .
cooling area temperature factor . . . . .
thermal conductance . . . . . . . . . . . .
resistance temperature factor of wire .
excitation range of B . . . . . . . . . . . .
excitation range of H . . . . . . . . . . . .
peak-to-peak ripple current . . . . . . . .
temperature rise caused by core losses
temperature rise caused by wire losses
total temperature rise . . . . . . . . . . . .
duty ratio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
temperature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
ambient temperature . . . . . . . . . . . .
Curie temperature of core material . .
maximum allowed temperature . . . . .
absolute permeability . . . . . . . . . . . .
kg
kg
kg
Am-1
W
W
W
W
W
W
W/K
m-1
s
s
V
V
V
m3
m3
m3
m3
m3
J
J
Wm-2K-1
WK-1
K-1
T
Am-1
A
C or K
C or K
C or K
C
C
C
C
Hm-1
Appendix D: Symbols
e .
o .
r .
rev
w
c .
ch
cu
.
.
p
n
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
equivalent permeability . . . . . . . . .
magnetic constant o= . . . . . . . . . .
relative permeability . . . . . . . . . . .
reversible permeability . . . . . . . . . .
wire resistivity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
core material mass density . . . . . . .
charge density . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
copper mass density (8.96 103kgm-3)
flux . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
radial frequency . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
pulse repetition radial frequency . . .
natural or break radial frequency . . .
89
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Hm-1
410-7 Hm-1
Hm-1
mm2m-1
kgm-3
Cm-3
kgm-3
Wb=Vs
s-1
s-1
s-1
90
References
References
91
REFERENCES
[1]
Bellman, R., Zadeh, L.A., Decision Making in a Fuzzy Environment, Management

Science, Vol.17 No.4, December 1970, pp.B141-B164
[2]
Braam, H.E., Intransitivity in fuzzy multi-criteria decisions, Masters Thesis, Delft UT,
Faculty of EE, Control laboratory, A93.051(642), March 1993
[3]
Chen, S.J., and Hwang, C.L., Fuzzy Multiple Attribute Decision Making, SpringerVerlag, Berlin Heidelberg, 1992
[4]
Dhawan, R.K., Davis., P., Naik, R., Fuzzy Logic Select Core Geometry for HF Power
Transformers, PowerConversion & Intelligent Motion, Vol.21, No.4, 1995, pp.44-49,
Vol.21, No.5, 1995, pp.34-42
[5]
Dorf, R.C., Modern Control Systems, 5th edition, Addison-Wesley Publishing Company
Inc., 1989
[6]
Dubois, D., Prade, H., Criteria Aggregation and Ranking of Alternatives in the
framework of Fuzzy Set Theory, in: Zimmerman, H.J., Zadeh, L.A., Gaines, B.R., eds.,
Fuzzy Sets and Decision Analysis, TIMS Studies in the Management Sciences, Vol.20
(North Holland, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1984), pp.209-240
[7]
Dubois, D., Prade, H., Possibility Theory: An Approach to Computerized Processing of

Uncertainty, Plenum Press, New York, 1988, pp.73-115
[8]
Haus, H.A., Melcher, J.R., Electromagnetic Fields and Energy, Prentice-Hall

International, 1989
[9]
Holt, D., Kaymak, U., Klaassens, J.B., Nauta Lemke van, H.R., A Fuzzy Decision
Support System for Magnetic Component Design, Proceedings XV European Annual
Conference on Human Decision Making and Manual Control, Soesterberg, The
Netherlands, 10-12 June, 1996
[10] Kassakian, J.G., Schlecht, M.F., Verghese, G.C., Principles of Power Electronics,
Addison-Wesley Publishing Company Inc., 1991
[11] Kusko, A., Wroblewski, T., Computer-Aided Design of Magnetic Circuits, The MIT
Press, 1969
[12] Lotfi, A.W., Lee, F.C., A High Frequency Model for Litz Wire for Switch-Mode
Magnetics, Proceedings of the IEEE Industry Applications Society Conference, Toronto,
Canada, Oct.2-8 1993, pp.1169-1175
92
References
[13] McLyman, Colonel Wm. T., Transformer and Inductor Design Handbook, Marcel
Dekker Inc., New York, 1978
[14] Mohan, N., Undeland, T.M., Robbins, W.P., Power Electronics: Converters, Applications, and Design, John Wiley & Sons Inc., 1989
[15] PHILIPS Data Handbook, Soft Ferrites, Magnetic Products Book MA01, PHILIPS
Components 1993
[16] Prakticum Handleiding Vermogenselektronica (in Dutch), Practical Work Guide Book,
Laboratory of Power Electronics and Electrical Machines, library number 2-68450,
Faculty of Electrical Engineering, Delft University of Technology, 1991
[17] Kaymak, U., Multicriteria Decision Making with the use of Fuzzy Sets, Masters Thesis,
Delft UT, Faculty of EE, Control laboratory, A92.032(606), June 1992
[18] Kaymak, U., van Nauta Lemke, H.R., A parametric generalized goal function for fuzzy
decision making with unequally weighted objectives, Proceedings of the Second IEEE
International Conference on Fuzzy Systems, Vol.2, pp.1156-1160
[19] Mesiar, R., Compensatory Operators based on Triangular Norms and Conorms, Proceedings of the third European Congress on Intelligent Techniques and Soft Computing,
pp.131-135, 1995
[20] Mizumoto, M., Pictorial representations of fuzzy connectives, part i: cases of t-norms,
t-conorms and averaging operators, Fuzzy Sets and Systems, Vol.31, pp.217-242, 1989
[21] Mizumoto, M., Pictorial representations of fuzzy connectives, part ii: cases of compensatory operators and self-dual operators. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, Fuzzy Sets and
Systems, Vol.32, pp. 45-79, 1989
[22] Nauta Lemke, van, H.R., Dijkman, T.G., Haeringen, van, H., Pleeging, M., A
Characteristic Optimism Factor in Fuzzy Decision Making, Proceedings IFAC Symp.
on Fuzzy Information, Knowledge Representation and Decision Analysis, Marseille,
France, 1983, pp.283-288
[23] Nauta Lemke, van, H.R., collegeaantekeningen bij het vak Fuzzy Logic for Engineering
Applications (in dutch), Lecture Notes 3rd part, Delft UT, Faculty of EE, Control
laboratory, 1995
[24] Neuijen, S.M.J.G., Research into the possibilities of using magnetic bearings in a
deployment test rig for solar arrays, Masters Thesis, Delft UT, Faculty of EE, Control
laboratory, A96.023(727), August 1996
[25] Volker, J.M., Preferentiebepaling in multicriteria beslisproblemen m.b.v. fuzzy logic (in
dutch), Masters Thesis, Delft UT, Faculty of EE, Control laboratory, A93.013(626),
March 1993
References
93
[26] Papoulis, A., Circuit and Systems, a modern approach, Holt, Rinehart and Winston Inc.,
1980
[27] Saaty, T.L., A scaling Method for Priorities in Hierarchical Structures, Journal of
Mathematical Psychology, Vol.15, 1977, pp.234-281
[28] SIEMENS Matsuhita Components handbook, Ferrite und Zubehr, 1994
[29] Smith, S., Magnetic Components, Design and Applications, Van Nostrand Reinhold
Company, New York, 1985
[30] Snelling, E.C., Soft Ferrites, Properties and Applications, Butterworth & Co. LTD, 1988
[31] Walbeek, van, J., Beslissen en besluitvorming m.b.v. Fuzzy Sets (in dutch), Masters
Thesis, Delft UT, Faculty of EE, Control laboratory, A92.015(595), June 1992
[32] Wright, G., Bolger, F., Expertise and Decision Support, Plenum Press, New York, 1992.
[33] Yager, R.R., Ordered weighted averaging aggregation operators in multi-criteria decision
making, IEEE Trans. on Systems, man and Cybernetics, Vol.18, pp.183-190, 1988
[34] Zadeh, L., Fuzzy sets, Information and control, Vol.8, pp.338-353, 1965
[35] Zimmerman, H.J., Fuzzy Set Theory, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, 1991
[36] Zimmerman, H.J., Zysno, P., Latent Connectives in Human Decision Making, Fuzzy
Sets and Systems, Vol.4, 1980, pp.37-51
[37] Heydeman, J., Reijntjes, R., Babuska, R., Kaymak, U., Nauta Lemke, van, H.R., A
Fuzzy Logic System for Security Analysis of Power Systems, Proceedings International
Conference on Intelligent Systems Applications to Power Systems ISAP96, Orlando,
January 1996, pp.405-409
[38] Kaymak, U., Babuska, R., Nauta Lemke, van, H.R., A Fuzzy Logic Decision Support
System for Security Analysis of Power Systems, Proceedings XIV European Annual
Conference on Human Decision Making and Manual Control, Delft, The Netherlands,
June 1995, session 5-1
[39] Hartog, den, M.H., Babuska, R., Deketh, H.J.R., Alvarez Grima, M., Knowledge-Based
Fuzzy Model for Performance Prediction of a Rock-Cutting Trencher, to appear in
Journal of Approximate Reasoning, 1996
[40] Holt, D., Kaymak, U., Klaassens, J.B., Nauta Lemke van, H.R., A Fuzzy Decision
Support System for Magnetic Component Design, to be published in Proceedings 7th
European Conference on Power Electronics and Applications, Trondheim, Norway, 8-10
September 1997
94

A Fuzzy Decision Support System For Magnetic Component Design THESIS-D.holt-1996-08

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

A Fuzzy Decision Support System For Magnetic Component Design THESIS-D.holt-1996-08

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

A Fuzzy Decision Support System for

Magnetic Component Design

A Fuzzy Decision Support System

Prof. Ir. G. Honderd

Delft University of Technology

3. DESIGN AND DECISION MAKING . . . . . . . .

4. DSS FOR AC-INDUCTOR DESIGN . . . . . . . .

6. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65

APPENDIX B: AC-INDUCTOR APPLICATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83

A basic classification of magnetic components is the following:

Filter inductors, resonance inductors:

Current-, voltage-, impedance- or pulse-transformers:

Transductors, magnetic amplifiers:

Rotating electrical machines:

Magnetic bearing, magnetic levitation:

2.2. Component elements

(coil former, wire insulation, layer insulation);

Three basic component elements:

Cross-section of assembled component.

More than 15 different ferrite core shapes

An example of an IEC norm:dimensions of RM-cores made of magnetic oxides

application tables: [15] pp.46-48 or [28] pp.134-138

Examples of different wire

A more sophisticated type of wire is the Litzendraht or

Wire is characterized by means of the following parameters:

When choosing the component elements,

2.3. Example: AC-inductor

Inductor used in output filter.

Possible examples of criteria imposed on an AC-inductor in for example aircraft applications

important relationships in inductor design are the relationships between:

in the airgap Vg is:

3. DESIGN AND DECISION MAKING

3.1. Magnetic component design

The construction of inductor alternatives from the elements

The influence on the overall performance is caused by three troublesome characteristics of

3.2. Decision making in design

An example of an alternative and its parameter values is the following:

: Solid Round Enamelled Wire

of this alternative (application: L = 4mH, L = 4A):

flux density excitation

3.3. Traditional design procedure

We start with a short description of an expert designing a magnetic component. In general,

From reference [29]:

choose the wire size nearest that specified by

From reference [15]:

3.4. Fuzzy Multiple Attribute Decision Making

General decision matrix of a decision problem

The definition of the decision elements is:

the discrete alternatives ai form a very large set of possible combinations of

the relative importance wj of the criteria cj (e.g. wj expresses that criterion

di = D(ri1,ri2, ,rim,w1,w2, ,wm)

3.4.2 fuzzy sets theory

fuzzy set of m is about 300g.

Fuzzy set with trapezoidal shape.

Examples of membership functions expressing criteria.

Explanation on some criteria of Figure 12.:

Criterion, fuzzy set and rating.

Assignment of two attribute ratings to some inductor alternative.

Judgments upon two attributes weight and temp.rise. In

Overview of decision matrix.

Example of final rating di of alternative ai by aggregation of criteria f(m)

Table II. shows some

Mapping of t-norms, t-conorms and averaging operators that