Current-Dependent Inductor Flux Bifurcation for Lower Fringing Loss

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing passive, current-dependent inductivities face challenges in minimizing losses while maintaining a compact size, as they suffer from increased magnetic field fringing and saturation issues that lead to inefficiencies and higher losses at higher currents.

Innovation Solution

A passive, current-dependent inductivity design featuring a magnetic core with a saturation region between the bank air gap and windings, where the magnetic flux bifurcates into paths with varying resistances, optimizing magnetic flux guidance and reducing losses by using materials with specific permeability characteristics and strategically placing air gaps to manage saturation effects.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Adaptability or versatility

If a stepped air gap is used in the central leg to achieve current-dependent inductivity, then the inductivity value decreases with increasing current, but the magnetic field fringing causes high losses and requires increased distance between windings and central leg

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecurrent-dependent inductivityVSAvoidmagnetic field losses
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSLoss of energy

Solution Approach 1:

The common bar is divided into a first section and a second section with different cross-sectional areas, creating distinct magnetic path segments. The first section has larger cross-section for low-current operation, while the second section with smaller cross-section activates at higher currents, providing segmented saturation behavior that reduces fringing losses

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

Different sections of the magnetic core are given different cross-sectional areas to create localized saturation characteristics. The first section maintains larger dimensions to guide flux away from windings, while the second section's smaller dimensions create controlled saturation that reduces fringing field interaction with windings at high currents

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

2Volume of moving object

If the first region acts as air gap at low currents to maintain compact size, then the inductivity is determined by this small region, but at saturation the combined air gap size increases fringing field reach and causes high losses

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveinductivity compact sizeVSAvoidmagnetic field losses
Core Design Contradiction:
Volume of moving objectVSLoss of energy

Solution Approach 1:

The air gap region is segmented into first and second sections with different cross-sectional areas. The first section provides the primary air gap effect for compact low-current operation, while the second section's smaller cross-section creates a bottleneck that limits fringing field expansion at high currents, reducing losses

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The solution transitions from a single-dimensional air gap approach to a two-dimensional segmented structure with varying cross-sections. This dimensional complexity allows the first section to provide compactness while the second section's reduced dimensions constrain fringing fields, solving both size and loss issues

Inventive Principle:
Principle #17Another dimension (Dimensionality change)

3Adaptability or versatility

If multiple air gaps of different sizes are used in parallel legs to achieve current-dependent inductivity, then the inductivity drops as current increases and legs saturate, but all air gaps are in immediate vicinity of windings causing fringing field interactions and losses

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecurrent-dependent inductivityVSAvoidfringing field interaction with windings
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSObject-affected harmful factors

Solution Approach 1:

The harmful fringing field interaction is eliminated by extracting the air gap from the immediate vicinity of the windings. The air gap is placed in the common bar away from the winding window, so fringing fields do not interact with windings even when the air gap is effectively active at high currents

Inventive Principle:
Principle #2Taking out (Extraction)

4Adaptability or versatility

If active current-dependent inductivity with control circuit is used to adapt inductivity, then great flexibility is achieved, but additional circuitry increases complexity, failure risk and costs

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveinductivity adaptabilityVSAvoidcircuitry complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The inductivity adapts to current conditions automatically through the passive saturation characteristics of the segmented magnetic core. The first and second sections naturally transition between active states based on current magnitude, providing self-regulating current-dependent inductivity without external control circuits or active components

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Applied Scientific Principles

This section explains which scientific principles are used to turn an abstract innovation direction into a practical engineering solution.

Function Achieved in This Case

This design minimizes losses and maintains a compact size by effectively guiding the magnetic flux, reducing fringing field interactions with windings, and allowing for efficient operation across a range of currents, with clear transitions in inductance values facilitating circuit design and fault detection.

Implementation Method 1

The saturation region (5) is arranged such that a magnetic flux path bifurcates into a first path passing through the saturation region and into a second path passing through the bank air gap (4) and bypassing the saturation region (5). The magnetic resistance of the first path is lower than the magnetic resistance of the second path for winding currents below a first saturation current and whereby the magnetic resistance of the second path is lower than the magnetic resistance of the first path for winding currents above the first saturation current due to significant saturation effects occurring in the saturation region (5).

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectMagnetic saturation: Magnetic Saturation

Data Source

PatentUS11763983B2Current dependent inductivity
Publication Date: 2023.09.19 DELTA ELECTRONICS (THAILAND) PUBLIC CO LTD
  • US11763983B2 patent drawing
  • US11763983B2 patent drawing
  • US11763983B2 patent drawing

AI summary

A passive, current dependent inductivity (1) comprises a magnetic core (2), windings (3) and at least one bank air gap (4). A saturation region (5) made of magnetic material is arranged between the bank air gap (4) and the windings (3). A magnetic flux path (6) bifurcates into a first path (61) passing through the saturation region (5) and into a second path (62) passing through the bank air gap (4) and bypassing the saturation region (5). The magnetic resistance of the first path (61) is lower than the magnetic resistance of the second path (62) for winding currents below a first saturation current (7a) and whereby the magnetic resistance of the second path (62) is lower than the magnetic resistance of the first path (61) for winding currents above the first saturation current (7a) due to saturation of the saturation region.