Chapter 1

Introduction
The precise modeling of electromagnetic devices, involves magnetic materials, needs an accurate
representation its magnetic characteristics. The magnetic characteristics involve non-linearity and hysteretic
nature as well. The first effort to solve the magnetic field problems by finite element method were made in
the late 1960s. The analysis of electrical machines by finite element method was first applied to
synchronous machines and dc machines in [1-2]. The operation of these machine types can be approximate
modeled by stationary fields They have been analyzed by using step by step methods to solve the time
dependence in [3] and by three dimensional finite element formulations in [4]. The filed computation with
nonlinear characteristics of an induction motor is done using an eddy current formulation and assuming
sinusoidal time variation. The time-stepping methods to calculate the time variation of magnetic fields in
the induction motors have been discussed in [5].
The core is the most difficult part of the transformer to model because of its highly nonlinear and multi-
valued (hysteretic) nature of magnetic characteristics and complex geometries. Several hysteresis models
have been proposed in the related literature. Among the models, the Preisach model and the Jiles-Atherton
(JA) model are the most widely used hysteresis models [6]. The JA model is particularly successful in field
computation, such as FEM, due to its easy implementation and relative simplicity with reasonable accuracy
[7-8]. It is relatively simple involving computation of only five parameters. However, it is very sensitive to
its parameter variations; determining the parameters with a reasonable accuracy is required [9]. A static
inverse JA model is presented in [10]. The report also describes FEM implementation of the using
differential reluctivity formulation and
0
and M formulation. The report showed dynamic loss




incorporation with the differential reluctivity term but it is not straightforward with the
0
and M
formulation.

1.1 Motivation and scope of work
Although the efficiency of a modern transformer may above 99%, the core loss cost still can be significant.
The core loss topic always attracted to the researchers. Despite of low values of core loss, there is a
continuous feeling of further improvement among the researchers. Even small improvement in the core loss
can make significant impacts on technical, economical and environmental issues. It requests the knowledge
of flux distribution in the core particularly on the core-joints, magnetization mechanism in the different
type of materials and performance of different materials in different type core structure. The literature
survey indicates no common agreement in the core design parameters. Further studies are still needed in
this area.
Another factor is the significance of core diagnosis that can make considerable impact on the total
owning cost of transformer with the prevention of long-term minor core faults. Existing core diagnosis
techniques are not much effective. There is still a need of efficient core diagnosis technique in todays
environment. The precise core modeling is still be a challenge to researchers due to it complex
heterogeneous structure, anisotropic and multi-valued nonlinear hysteresis characteristics.










1.2 Outline of the thesis
In Chapter 2 , a general theory about finite element method and electromagnetic field theory. This
chapter describes the electromagnetic field theory, with potential function formulation, results in boundary
value problem
Chapter 3, describes the finite element formulation of electromagnetic fields.
Chapter 4, describes implematation of hysteresis by using various hysteresis models which have
been proposed in the literature lik Jiles-Atherton (JA) and the Preisach Model.
Chapter 5,describes the methods and ways for solving proposed problem
Chapter 6, in this chapter simulation and results are given for proposed
Chapter 7, in this chapter some conclusions are drawn from the analysis of proposed geometery of
core which and . Some ideas for future research on coupled field analysis of electromagnetic devices are
also given.



















Chapter 2
Theory and application of finite element
method in electromagnetics
2.1 Theory of Finite Element Method
The finite element method has become a well established method in many fields of computer aided
engineering, such as, electromagnetic field computation, fluid dynamics and structural analysis. The finite
element method is basically, an efficient approximation method to solve the partial differential equations or
boundary-value problems, which are frequently occurred in different areas of engineering. There are three
main steps during the solution of partial differential equation (PDE) with the finite element method. First
the domain on which the PDE should be solved, descritized into finite elements. Depending on the
dimension of the problem, this can be triangles, squares, rectangles or tetrahedrons, cubes, or hexahedrons.
The solution of PDE is approximated by piecewise continuous polynomials and the PDE hereby descritized
and split into finite number of algebraic equations. Thus, the aim is to determine the unknown coefficient of
these polynomials in such a way, that distance (which is defined by the norm in a suitable vector space)
from the exact solution becomes a minimum. Therefore, the finite element is essentially a variational
minimization technique [11].
Since the number of elements is finite, we have reduced the problem of finding a continuous solution to
our PDEs to calculating the finite number of coefficients of the polynomial. The solution of the Poissons
equation, which is required to calculate the magnetic vector potential, has to be solved for a given current
density distribution. One can write the Poissons equation in more general form as [11],




( ) ( )
2
u r f r V = (1)

In order to apply the finite element method, there are two methods are given in the corresponding literature
as the variational formulation and the Galerkins formulation. The variational formulation is based on the
energy minimization in the domain which is equivalent to the solution. The Galerkins methods leads to the
week formulation of the problem: we multiply Poisson equation by the test function u and integrate over
the solution domain

2
( ). ( ) ( ) ( ) u r v r dr f r v r dr } } V =
O O
(2)

Integration by parts gives

( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) u r v r dr u r v r dr f r v r dr
O I O
V V + V =
} } }
(3)

where, dr denotes the surface normal on the boundary. If appropriate boundary conditions define the value
of u (Dirichlet boundary condition) or of its derivative (Neumann boundary conditions) on the boundary, it
can be simplified (the homogeneous Neumann boundary conditions vanishes the term), and the Dirichlet
boundary conditions have to be apply in the equation given by,
( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) u r v r dr gv r dr f r v r dr
n
} } } V V + =
O I O
(4)

The exact solution u
i
can be approximated by a linear combination of trial functions,
0
( ) ( )
n
h i i
i
u r u r
=
=

(5)

And we use a finite set of test functions
i




By inserting this expansion into the equation (5) and assume only Dirichlet boundary conditions, then it
becomes,
( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
0
n
u r v r dr f r v r dr
i i i i
i

} } V V =
=
(6)

A system of algebraic equations is obtained. It can be solved with any standard method for the solution of a
system of algebraic equations, such as Gauss method, the Cholesky decomposition or iterative scheme like
the conjugate gradient method.



Fig. 1. Problem domain and Boundary conditions

The value of the solution is explicitly defined on the boundary (or on a part of it). The value of solution can
be zero or non-zero on the boundary.








2.2 Application of FEM in Electromagnetic Field Computation

The theory of electromagnetics can be described by the Maxwells equations and constitutive equations.
The consistency of these equations (along with constitutive ones) is so high that very distinct phenomena
(like microwaves and permanent magnet fields) can be precisely described by these. The formulation and
the basic concepts of the electromagnetics are relatively simple but a realistic problem can be much
complex and difficult to solve. Due to complicated geometries, non-linearity, and hysteretic nature of
materials make it virtually impossible to find analytical solutions for such problems. Hence the numerical
methods have become widely used tools in electrical engineering nowadays.
The general, time dependent, Maxwells equations in differential form (also called point or local form) are

B
E
t
c
V =
c
(7)

D
H J
t
c
V = +
c
(8)

D V = (9)

0 B V = (10)


The differential form is more convenient in calculations using methods such as finite element method or
finite difference method, while integral form is more convenient in analytic calculation of fields and in
various integral methods of numerical calculations such as the method of moments and boundary element
methods.



The Potential functions are viewed as alternative representation of the electromagnetic field. These are the
simpler, more useful to describe the field properties rather than to use an abstract field variable like
magnetic flux density, magnetic field intensity etc. the magnetic vector potential function is defined based
on the solenoidal nature of the magnetic fields. The magnetic flux density B is solenoidal in nature (i.e.
0 B V = ), it can be derived as the curl of another vector given by,

B A = V (12)

Here, A, is called the magnetic vector potential. The condition 0 A V = is known as Coulomb gauge
condition. This relation is consistent with the field equations because as leads to continuity equation.
In the case of the magnetic vector potential

1
s
A
A J V
t t
c

| | c c | |
V V = + V
| |
c c
\ . \ .
(13)

Using the relations B=H and D= E and vector identity which is given as,

( ) ( )
2
A A A V V = V V V (14)

The Equation (2) can be rewritten as in generalize form as,
( )
2
2
2
V A
A A J
t t
c c
| | c c | |
V V V = V
| |
c c
\ .
\ .
(15)

In the case of low frequency (static and quasi-static cases ), last term can be neglected and if there is no
electric scalar potential is present, then the resultant equation will be

( )
2
A A J V V V = (16)




Now, using the Coulomb gauge, the resultant equation will be partial differential equation in terms of
magnetic vector Potential

2
A J V = (17)

It can be solved with knowledge of magnetic vector potential on the boundary of the solution domain [16].

























Chapter 3
FEM formulation for electromagnetic field
computation

3.1 Magneto-static Analysis
In the magneto static analysis, the quantities are not time dependent. This analysis is generally required for
the problems of steady flow of dc electric current, permanent magnets etc. [11].The governing equation for
the magneto-static case can be derived from (15) and it can be given as,

2 2
2 2
1 1
s
d A d A
J
dx dy
+ = (18)

By using the finite element formulation as discussed in section (II-A), it will result in the algebraic equation
of the form

| |{ } { } S A J = (19)

The linear magneto-static analysis has been done for a bar plate problem. The finite element mesh and flux
distribution is shown in Fig.2 and Fig.3 respectively.







Fig 2.Finite Element Mesh in Problem Domain



Fig 3. Flux Lines











3.2 Time-Harmonic analysis

In the quasi-static case (with eddy currents are considered), the governing equation can be given as,
1
S
V
t t
o o o

c c
V V = V =
c c
A A
A J (20)
Or it can also be written as,
2
1
S
t
o

c
V = +
c
A
A J (21)

In eq. (21), the first term on RHS indicates the source current density and the second term indicates the
eddy current density. The above equation can be solved with transient formulation as well as time harmonic
case (in case of linear analysis).
The FEM formulation for time-harmonic analysis is similar to magneto static analysis as described above.
Due to presence of eddy currents in time-harmonic analysis, there will be an additional term in the resultant
FEM equation for time-harmonic analysis as given in

| |{ } | |{ } { }
r i r i r i
S A jA j T A jA J jJ e + + + = + (22)

In comparison to magneto-static analysis, all the quantities in time-harmonic analysis are in complex form.

The linear magneto-static analysis has been done for the geometry shown in Fig.4. The finite element mesh
and flux distribution at different frequencies is shown in Fig.5,6,7, and 8.







Fig.4.Geometry for Time-Harmonic Analysis


Fig.5 Meshing of Time-Harmonic Geometry


Fig.6.Flux Distribution at 0 Hz





Fig.7.Flux Distribution at 50 Hz


Fig.8.Flux Distribution at 300 Hz


3.3 Non-Linear Electromagnetic FEM Analysis
The magnetic materials are characterized by nonlinear and hysteretic magnetic characteristics. This section
discussed the nonlinear characteristics without hysteresis. These materials are characterized by a nonlinear
B-H curve and the permeability is field dependent (B or H). The governing equation for a non-linear
magnetostatic case can be written as,
( )
2
1
A J
B
V = (23)




The above equation can be solved using iterative methods such as fixed-point and Newton-Raphson
methods. The rate of convergence of Newton-Raphson method is higher than the fixed-point method but it
needs appropriate initial values. The Newton-Raphson method is described below.

3.3.1 The Newton-Raphson Method

It is based on the Taylor series method. The series is truncated after its first term for simplicity. For a
column vector P, which is a function of a vector X, the truncated Taylor series is, for X close to X
m

( )
m m
P
P X X
X
A (
+
(
A

(24)

where,
P
X
A (
(
A

is the Jacobian of P at X
m.
. For example, P and X have three components for three variables

1 1 1
1 2 3
2 2 2
1 2 3
3 3 3
1 2 3
P P P
x x x
P P P P
X x x x
P P P
x x x
( c c c
(
c c c
(
(
c c c A (
=
(
(
A c c c

(
(
c c c
(
c c c (



If X
m
is not too far from the solution of P, we find that X
m+1
in the relation as,

( )
1
0
m m m
m
P
P X X
X
+
A (
+ =
(
A

(25)
Or,

1 m m
m
P
X P
X
+
A (
A =
(
A

(26)




and the updation can be done in unknown variables as,

1 1 m m m
X X X
+ +
= +A
(27)

It will continue until the convergence is reached.
3.3.2 Non-linear Magnetostatic Analysis with Magnetic Vector Potential
Formulation

The resultant FEM matrix system of equations for a non-linear case is given as [11],

SJ A R A =
(28)

The right-hand side vector R is called a residual vector, can be obtained as

R SS A Q =
(29)

where, A is the unknown magnetic vector potential and Q is the source vector. The column matrix P is the
matrix product SSA where X has been replaced by A. This matrix product P
i
(k) is obtained by assembling
the terms below as,
( ) ( )
3
1
2
i l k l k l
i
P k q q r r A
D

=
= +

(30)
The general term of the Jacobian
P
X
A (
(
A

matrix can be determined as [11],
( ) ( ) ( )
2 3
2
1
1
2 2
i n k n k k l k l l
l n n
B
P k q q r r q q r r A
A D D A B
v v
=
c c c
= + + +
c c c



(31)



We need to calculate
2
n
B
A
c
c
, which can be determined as,
( )
3
1
i i i i
i
A p q x r y A
=
= + +

(32)

Now magnetic flux density B can find using the relation B A = V as,

A A
B i j
y x
c c
=
c c
(33)

( )
2 3
2
1
2
l n l n l
l n
B
q q r r A
A D
=
c (
= +
(
c

(34)

Now the global Jacobian matrix SJ can be obtained by assembling the terms given below,

( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
3 3
2 2
1 1
4
, , , ,
i l l
l l
J n k S k n S n l A S k l A
D B
v
v
= =
c ( ( | |
= +
| ( (
c
\ .

(35)

where,
( ) ( ) ,
2
k l k l
S n k q q r r
D
v
= +
(36)











The non-linear magneto-static analysis has been done for a bar plate problem. The flux distribution with
MATLAB code is shown in Fig.9. The MATLAB results are validated with commercial FEMM software.


Fig.9.Non-linear analysis (Flux Density)



Fig.10.FEMM analysis (Flux Density)














Chapter 4
Implementation of Hysteresis in FEM
modeling

The unique feature of the magnetic materials is magnetic hysteresis. Various hysteresis models have been
proposed in the literature. The Jiles-Atherton (JA) and the Preisach model are most frequently used
hysteresis models in electromagnetic field problems [6]. These models can be coupled with the Maxwells
equations in order to obtain accurate solutions for electromagnetic field problems. The Jiles-Atherton
Hysteresis model
The Jiles-Atherton model is based on energy balance equation. In the JA model, the magnetization M is
decomposed into its two components, viz. reversible M
rev
and irreversible component M
irr
. The model can
be represented by the following first- order differential equation [9],

( )
0
( ) ( )
( ) ( ) ( )
an irr an
an irr
M H M H dM dM dM
c
dH k M H M H dH dH
| |
= +
|
o o
\ .
(37)

where, M is the total magnetization, H is the applied magnetic field, M
an
is the anhysteretic
magnetization,
0

is the magnetic permeability of free space, and o is the directional parameter defined as,

1 for 0 and ( ( ) ( )) >0
1 for 0 and ( ( ) ( )) <0
an
an
dH dt M H M H
dH dt M H M H
o = + >
`
o = <
)
(38)

The anhysteretic magnetization M
an
is defined as,



( ) coth
e
an e s
e
H a
M H M
a H
( | |
| |
=
( |
|
\ . ( \ .
(39)
where, H
e
is the effective field and can be written as,

e
H H M o = + (40)
The five physical parameters of the JA model and their physical interpretations are given as,
- Ms (A/m) : Saturation magnetization
- a (A/m) : Form-factor or shape factor
- k (A/m) : Domain wall pinning constant (irreversible magnetization component)
- c (dimensionless): Domain wall bowing parameter (reversible magnetization component)
- (dimensionless): Mean field parameter. (inter-domain coupling)

The values of these parameters can be determined by parameter identification process using iterative or
optimization techniques. The model is relatively simpler one to implement in numerical techniques of field
computation. We will describe here implementation of JA model in finite element method for
electromagnetic field problem. In the original JA model, we can obtain magnetic induction B by giving
magnetic field H as an input to the model. However, when using a magnetic vector potential formulation B
is obtained directly from the computed magnetic vector potential at each time step. To overcome this
problem, an inverse JA model proposed in [10] allowing the magnetic induction B as an input and gives the
magnetic field H as an output.








Chapter 5
Methodology
5.1 Original JA hysteresis model

In the original JA model, the magnetization M is decomposed into its two components, viz. reversible M
rev

and irreversible component M
irr
. The model can be represented by the following first- order differential
equation [51],

( )
0
( ) ( )
( ) ( ) ( )
an irr
an irr
an
M H M H
k M H M H
dM
dH dM dM
c
dH dH
(
+
(
o o
(
=
(
| |
(
|
( \ .

(41)

where, M is the total magnetization, H is the applied magnetic field, M
an
is the anhysteretic
magnetization,
0

is the magnetic permeability of free space, and o is the directional parameter has the
value +1 if dH/dt >0 and -1 if dH/dt < 0.
Derivative of M
irr
with respect to H
e
can be given as,

irr an irr
e
dM M M
dH ko

= (42)

The relation between anhysteretic and reversible magnetization and total magnetization are given as,

( )
rev an irr
M c M M = (43)
rev irr
M M M = + (44)




The anhysteretic magnetization M
an
is defined as,

( ) coth
e
an e s
e
H a
M H M
a H
( | |
| |
=
( |
|
\ . ( \ .
(45)

where, H
e
is the effective field and can be written as,

e
H H M o = + (46)

and, the constitutive relation is given as,

( )
0
B H M = + (47)

where, a, , c, k, and M
s
are the five parameters which can be determined from the measured hysteresis
curve using a parameter identification procedure as discussed in [50].
The hysteresis equation (41) is derived from an energy balance equation. The supplied magnetic energy
appears either as a change in magnetization in the form of magneto-static energy or be dissipated due to
irreversible change of magnetization in the form of hysteresis loss. The magnetization can be represented
by anhysteretic magnetization, as given by (45), when the hysteresis loss is zero.
Additional losses which generally occur in a conducting magnetic material are the classical eddy current
loss and anomalous loss [52]. The classical eddy current loss per unit volume is proportional to the square
rate of change of magnetic induction and to square of the thickness of material. This component of the loss
assumes fine enough sample to neglect the skin-effect. The classical eddy current instantaneous power loss
per unit volume is given as,

2
2
B
2
EC
dW d d
dt dt |
| |
=
|
\ .
(48)




where, d and represent thickness (m) and resistivity (-m) respectively. B is the magnetic induction.
is a geometrical parameter (=6 for lamination, =16 for cylinder)
Anomalous loss has been treated on the basis of a statistical approach to the loss phenomenology in [52].
The anomalous loss results from domain wall motion during the change in the domain wall configuration in
magnetization process. It is generally expressed as,

1 3
2 2
0
B
A
GdwH dW d
dt dt
| | | |
=
| |
\ . \ .
(49)

where, G is a dimensionless coefficient of eddy current damping (0.1356), w indicates the width of
laminations (m) and H
0
characterizes the statistical distribution of the internal domain wall field and takes
into account the grain size.


5.2 Inverse Dynamic JA Model

The energy balance equation in the presence of classical eddy current and anomalous loss can be written as
[46],
( ) ( )
( )
0 0
2
0
3 2
1
an e e
irr
e e
e
a
M H dH M H dH
dM dB
k c dH k dt
dH dt
dB
k dt
dt

o
(
(
= +
(
(
| |
| |
(
+ +
| |
(
\ .
\ .
(
(
| |
( |
\ .
} }
} }
}
(50)

Equation (50) can be converted into a manageable form by assuming B=
0
M, which is generally valid in
case of soft magnetic materials [46], and divided by
0
. It leads to,




( ) ( )
( )
1 2
1
an e e
irr
e e e
e e
a e
e
M H dH M H dH
dM dB dM
k c dH k dH
dH dt dH
dB dM
k dH
dt dH
o
(
(
= +
(
(
| | | |
| |
(
+ +
| | |
(
\ .
\ . \ .
(
(
| |
| |
(
| |
\ . ( \ .
} }
} }
}
(51)


Differentiating (51) with respect to H
e
and using the relations given in (43-44) it becomes,

( )
an
an d
e e e
dM dM dM
M M k k c P t
dH dH dH
o o = + + (52)

The dynamic loss term P
d
(t) can be expressed as, ( )
1 2
d e a
dB dB
P t k k
dt dt
| |
= +
|
\ .
(53)
where, k
e
and k
a
are dynamic loss parameters, which can be defined as,

2
1
2
0
2
e
a
d
k
GdwH
k
|

`
| |
=
|
\ . )
(54)

Equation (52) can be rewritten as,

( )
an
d an
e e
dM dM
k P t M M k c
dH dH
o o
| |
+ = (
|

\ .
(55)

From the effective flux density, we have B
e
=
0
H
e
and then we have,





0
e
e
dB
dH
= (56)

Using equation (56), equation (55) can be expressed as,

( )
0
an
d an
e e
dM dM
k P t M M k c
dB dH
o o
| |
+ = (
|

\ .
(57)

And the term,
e
dM
dB
can also be written as,
e e
dM dM dB
dB dB dB
= (58)

Using the relationships, given in (46) and (47), flux density can be expressed as,

0 0 e
B B M M o = + (59)

Differentiating (59) with respect to B
e
and substituting in (58), gives,

( )
( ) ( )
0
1 1
e
dM dB dM
dB dM dB o
=

(60)

Now, using the relation (60), equation (57) can be written as,

( )
( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
0
( )
1 ( )
M an an e
M an an e d
M M k c dM dH
dM
dB
M M k c dM dH k P t
o o
o o o o

=
( + +

(61)




5.3 Implementation of the JA hysteresis model in FEM computations
The JA model can be implemented in FEM calculations using some standard iterative methods such as
fixed point method and Newton-Raphson method. Another alternative is time stepping method using
inverse JA hysteresis model which is based on differential reluctivity approach.
The governing equation for diffusion equation;


2
1
S
t
o

c
V = +
c
A
A J (62)
If we neglect the eddy current term
t
o
c | |
|
c
\ .
A
in above equation, we get;
2
1
S

V = A J (63)

In case of ferromagnetic materials will be a function of B or H and above problem can be treated as
nonlinear as well as hysteretic in nature. The problem with hysteresis characteristics can be solved with
differential reluctivity.

The generalize relationship between vector B and H can be expressed as [11];


d
d d v = B (64)

The differential reluctivity can be expressed for 2-D case as,

2 2
x x y y
d
x y
H B H B
B B
v
A A + A A
=
A + A
(65)




The final equation to be solved is

( ( )) ( ) ( ( )) ( )
d d
t t t t t t v v V V +A = +A +V V V A J A H (66)

Equation (66) is solved iteratively incorporation with the JA hysteresis equation (37). The third term can be
considered as a secondary source.
At each time step, B(t+t) is obtained with the computed A(t+t) for each mesh element. The inverse JA
model is used to obtain H
x
(t+t) and H
y
(t+t) for the components of magnetic induction B
x
(t+t) and
B
y
(t+t) respectively. H
x
and H
y
are evaluated as from the known H
x
(t) and H
y
(t) from previous
time step. v
d
is calculated using eq. (65). The elemental matrices are recalculated with the new v
d
and
again solved (66). This procedure is repeated until the convergence is achieved.




















Chapter 6
Simulation and Results
Fig.11-15 are the output which got for designed core of transformer

Fig.11.Computed hysteresis loop at a point in Yoke




Fig.12.Computed hysteresis loop at a point

Fig.13.Current Waveform




Fig14.Magnetic Field at a point

Fig.15.Flux Density at a point




Fig.16(a).Flux at 10 Hz

Fig.16(b).Flux at 50 Hz




Fig.16(c).Flux at 100 Hz

















The finite element mesh and flux density at different frequencies is shown in Fig.17(a),(b),(c).

Fig.17(a).Flux density at 10 Hz

Fig.17(b).Flux density at 50 Hz




Fig.17(c).Flux density at 100 Hz










Chapter 7
Conclusion

The report discussed the FEM formulation for the static, time-harmonic and non-linear magnetostatic
analysis. The above formulation has been applied in the 2-D field analyses. The all formulation has been
implemented with MATLAB programming with the validation of results by commercial FEM softwares.
The nonlinear magnetostatic problem is the first step towards hysteresis implementation in FEM. The
theoretical work of hysteresis is completed in stage BTP project stage-1 and implementation of hysteresis
in FEM is completed in this stage. The report describes FEM implementation of the JA model. Using the
model, one can incorporate the dynamic losses in the field analyses in a direct way. Both the differential
reulctivity and M and
0
formulations can be used in the dynamic cases.
This work presents a detailed literature review on the transformer core design, diagnosis and modeling. The
reported work shows a need of further work on the core design to improve the performance of transformer.
The minor core faults in core may lead to increased core-loss, which in turn increase the transformer
capitalizing cost significantly. The possibility of using the Jiles-Atherton hysteresis model in the core
diagnosis, as discussed in this report, may be extended to determine the excess stress level, interlamination
short-circuits and deformation in transformer core. The JA hysteresis model may be helpful to determining
the building factor of transformer core and separation of core loss in hysteresis, eddy current and
anomalous losses as well.
This report presented the anisotropic modeling of core with the assumption of B and H is in same
direction. The assumption is not realistic in Grain-oriented materials. These materials show some finite
angle between B and H due to M. The discussed anisotropic model may be extended to consider the angle
between B and H. In two dimensional FEM core modeling, the interlaminar flux component has been



ignored in literature. However, experimental studies showed its significant impact on the core loss and local
flux distributions. The core modeling may be extended to consider these effects.
Future work
Till now we worked on single phase,three limed transformer core,the most popular joint used at the
intersection of the center limb and the yokes in the 40-90 degree T-joint.It is simple and economical to
manfacture because the laminations are cut out either 40 degree or 90 degrees to the rolling direction and
with careful cutting procedure the amount of waste material is very small.In future we are going to work on
three phase,three limed transformer core and another type of joint configuration referred to as the Y-45
degree T-joint.





















Chapter 8
References
[1] M.V.K Chari, and P. Silvester, Analysis of Turbo-alternator Magnetic Fields by Finite Elements,
IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems, Vol. 90, pp. 454-464, 1971
[2] M.V.K Chari, and P. Silvester, Finite Element Analysis of Magnetically Saturated DC machines,
IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems, Vol. 90, pp. 2362-2372, 1971
[3] S.C. Tandon, A.F. Armor, and M.V.K. Chari, Nonlinear Transient Finite Element Field computation
for Electrical machines and Devices, IEEE Transaction on Apparatus and Systems, Vol.102, pp.1089-
1096, 1971
[4] M.V.K. Chari, Threedimensional Vector Potential Analysis for Machine Field Problem, IEEE
Transaction on Apparatus and Systems, Vol.18, pp.436-446
[5] F. Bouillault, and A. Rajek, Dynamic Model for Eddy Current Calculation in Saturated Electrical
machines, IEEE Transaction on Apparatus and Systems, Vol.19, pp. 2639-2642,1983
[6] M. Pasquale, G. Bertotti, D. C. Jiles, and Y. Bi, Application of the Preisach and Jiles-Atherton Models
to the Simulation of Hysteresis in Soft Magnetic Alloys, Journal of Applied Physics, Vol. 85, pp. 4373-
4375, 1999
[7] H. Li, Q. Li, X. Xu, T. Lu, J. Zhang, and L. Li, A modified Method for Jiles-Atherton Hysteresis
Model and Its Application in Numerical Simulation of Devices Involving Magnetic Materials, IEEE
Transactions on Magnetics, Vol. 47, pp. 1094-1097, 2011
[8] M. Pasquale, G. Bertotti, D. C. Jiles, and Y. Bi, Application of the Preisach and Jiles-Atherton Models
to the Simulation of Hysteresis in Soft Magnetic Alloys, Journal of Applied Physics, Vol. 85, pp. 4373-
4375, 1999.



[9] A. P. S. Baghel and S. V. Kulkarni, Parameter Identification of the Jiles-Atherton Hysteresis Model
using a Hybrid Technique, IET-Electric Power Application, Paper under Review
[10] H. L. Toms, R. G. Colclaser, and M. P. Krefta, Two-Dimensional Finite Element Magnetic
Modeling for Scalar Hysteresis Effects, IEEE Transaction on Magnetics, Vol. 37, pp. 982-988, 2001
[11] U. D. Annakkage, P. G. Mclaren, E. Dirks, R. P. Jayasinghe, and A. D. Parker, A Current
Transformer Model Based on the Jiles-Atherton Theory of Ferromagnetic Hysteresis, IEEE
Transactions on Magnetics, Vol. 15, pp. 57-61, 2000
[12] D. C. Jiles, J. B. Thoelke and M. K. Devine, Numerical Determination of Hysteresis Parameters
for the Modeling of Magnetic Properties Using the Theory of Ferromagnetic Hysteresis, IEEE
Transactions on Magnetics, Vol. 28, pp. 27-35, 1992
[13] N. Sadowski, N. J. Betistela, J. P. A. Bastos, and L. M. Mazenc, An Inverse Jiles-Atherton Model
to take into Account Hysteresis in Time-stepping Finite-Element Calculations, IEEE Transaction on
Magnetics, Vol. 38, pp. 797-800, 2002
[14] J. P. A. Bastos, and N. Sadowski, Electromagnetic modeling by finite element methods, Marcel
Dekker, Inc New York, 2003