A comparison of single-layer coaxial coil mutual inductance calculations using finite-element and tabulated methods

Quick and accurate methods to calculate the mutual inductance of coaxial single layer coils remains important to this day in a large variety of engineering and physical disciplines. While modern finite-element electromagnetic field codes can do this accurately, the engineer often requires only a first- or second-order estimate before proceeding to the numerical analysis stage. Grover's tabular data, developed in the first half of the 20th century, remains the standard for manually calculating mutual inductance for a wide variety of coil and wire forms. This investigation reports the accuracy of mutual inductance calculations for single-layer coaxial coils based on Grover's tables when compared to estimates obtained with a finite-element electromagnetic field code (FEEFC). Since it is impractical to construct and characterize the numerous coils needed for this type of investigation, the FEEFC results are treated as actual inductance measurements. Grover reported his tabular data to be accurate within five significant digits excluding the cases when the coils are loosely coupled and when the coils are short. This investigation found Grover's tabular method to be inaccurate for loosely coupled and short coils, but also found that significant error for closely coupled coils as well. The maximum error between Grover's tabular method and the FEEFC results is 9.8%. Knowing the error associated with Grover's method and the coil geometry for which the error occurs is an important aid for the engineer and scientist

[1]  T.H. Hubing,et al.  Traces in proximity to gaps in return planes , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Electromagnetic Compatibility.

[2]  S. Liu,et al.  High frequency PM synchronous motor model determined by FE analysis , 2006, IEEE Transactions on Magnetics.

[3]  F.W. Grover Tables for the Calculation of the Mutual Inductance of Any Two Coaxial Single-Layer Coils , 1933, Proceedings of the Institute of Radio Engineers.

[4]  C. Akyel,et al.  New analytic-numerical solutions for the mutual inductance of two coaxial circular coils with rectangular cross section in air , 2006, IEEE Transactions on Magnetics.

[5]  David Blaauw,et al.  Modeling and analysis of crosstalk noise in coupled RLC interconnects , 2006, IEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems.

[6]  Il-Han Park,et al.  Reduced modeling of eddy current-driven electromechanical system using conductor segmentation and circuit parameters extracted by FEA , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Magnetics.

[7]  S. Krishnan,et al.  Loop-based inductance extraction and modeling for multiconductor on-chip interconnects , 2006, IEEE Transactions on Electron Devices.

[8]  Frederick Warren Grover,et al.  Inductance Calculations: Working Formulas and Tables , 1981 .

[9]  D. Zarko,et al.  Turbogenerator end winding leakage inductance calculation using a 3-D analytical approach based on the solution of Neumann integrals , 2003, IEEE International Electric Machines and Drives Conference, 2003. IEMDC'03..

[10]  K. F. Riley,et al.  Mathematical methods for the physical sciences , 1975 .

[11]  Akira Chiba,et al.  Performances of bearingless and sensorless induction motor drive based on mutual inductances and rotor displacements estimation , 2006, IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics.

[12]  P. E. Burke,et al.  The Accurate Computation of Self and Mutual Inductances of Circular Coils , 1978, IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems.

[13]  Stacy Rohe Investigation of the accuracy of Grover's method when solving for the mutual inductance of two single-layer coaxial coils , 2005 .

[14]  J.D. van Wyk,et al.  Improvement of EMI filter performance with parasitic coupling cancellation , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics.