2670
MAY 10x9
The Optimal Form for Coreless Inductors
PAUL N . MURGATROYD
Abstract-A fundamental problem of inductor design is to obtain the
greatest possible inductance with a piece of round wire. The optimal
design is a solenoid with many layers of circular turns, and the maxi-
mum inductance scales with the five-thirds power of the total length of
wire used. For practical reasons other design types, including solenoids
and toroids, also are commonly used. These may have one, few, or
many layers, and all have optimal forms with associated scaling rules.
By describing the class of coreless inductors in a common notation, a
significant unification of design is achieved.
I. INTRODUCTION
I N THE published literature, formulas for calculating in-
ductance tend to be of two main types. In handbook
collections for the engineer or technician, the formulas
are usually accurate only within a limited range of design
parameters. However, the mathematical expressions usu-
ally are relatively short. In academic works, the opposite
combination is found, and the formulas are more accurate
in a wider range, but much longer. The largest collection,
mainly of the second type, was published in 1946 by
Grover [ 11. With the increasing availability of computer
power to evaluate the complicated expressions, the classic
geometries still attract detailed attention [2]. A common
feature of both main types is that they are “forwards”
formulas, meaning that the shape, size, and number of
turns are given, so the formula delivers the inductance
value. For the practical engineer or designer, these for-
mulas are the wrong way round, because the given param-
eters will typically be a wire diameter, usually set by the
current rating, and a specified inductance value. There
may also be constraints on shape, cost, or external mag-
netic field. For the practical person, shape, size, and num-
ber of turns are the end of the design, not the beginning,
so the “forwards” type of formula can only be used in a
sequential process of trial-and-error. Much more useful
would be a “backwards” formula, that starts from the
wire diameter and specified inductance, and delivers di-
rectly the required coil design.
It has been suggested [3] that the dominance of “for-
wards” formulas in the literature is due to two main fac-
tors. Firstly, the people who derived the accurate formu-
las were, like Grover, mainly workers in Standards
Laboratories. Their prime objective was to make calcu-
lable devices, fit to establish reliably the linkage between
electrical standards and length standards. So the accuracy
Manuscript received August 15, 1988; revised January 18, 1989.
The author is with the Department of Electronic and Electrical Engi-
neering, Loughborough University of Technology, Loughborough, LEI 1
3TU, England.
IEEE Log Number 8926998.
001 8-9464/89/0500-2670$01 .OO 0 1989 IEEE
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON MAGNETICS. VOL. 2 5 . NO 3.
of the inductance, of whatever value in a small range, was
more important than the value itself. “Forwards” for-
mulas meet just this requirement. The second factor is not
historical, but fundamental. The “backwards” problem
has no unique solution. It is possible to achieve a required
inductance value, even with a given type of wire, in any
number of different ways. For example, in simple sole-
noids with circular turns, a few large turns, or many small
turns, or any combination in-between, will deliver the
value. Thus the trial-and-error process using a “for-
wards” formula can end, if inductance value is the sole
objective, with all manner of different solutions which
may be more or less acceptable for other subsidiary rea-
sons. One such reason is the most economic use of wire.
In “A Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism” James
Clerk Maxwell [4] examined the following problem. “To
find the form of a coil for which the coefficient of self-
induction is a maximum, the total length and thickness of
the wire being given.” The solution appears in a chapter
headed Circular Currents, and perhaps it was obvious to
Maxwell that a solenoid with many circular turns closely
packed into many layers gives the best solution to the
problem as posed. The conclusion of his analysis was that
“if the channel in which the coil is wound has a square
transverse section, the mean diameter of the coil should
be 3.7 times the side of the square-section of the chan-
nel.”
From the point of view of a coil designer or manufac-
turer, Maxwell’s problem may appear somewhat aca-
demic. Such people have to make inductors with specified
values, using wire of sufficient sectional area to avoid
overheating at the specified current loading: making the
maximum possible inductance from a fixed length of wire
is not the standard problem. Consequently, few such
practical people have heard of the Brooks Inductor [5]
which gives a more accurate and simply described em-
bodiment of the solution, and may be designed to deliver
a required inductance value in a direct and straightforward
way. This paucity of general awareness of the Brooks In-
ductor is unfortunate for several reasons, among which
the ability to make the most economic use of wire is only
one.
For various good technical reasons, many coreless in-
ductors deliberately are not made as many-layered sole-
noids. Coils with one layer, or just a few layers, are often
simpler to make and more easily cooled. If induced elec-
tromagnetic interference is a problem, toroidal inductors
may be preferred to solenoids (even though they typically
require twice as much wire for the same inductance value),
MURGATROYD: OPTIMAL FORM FOR CORELESS INDUCTORS
because toroids effectively enclose their own magnetic
fields. To disperse heat, or to reduce interturn capaci-
tance, spaced-out windings may be preferred. All these
features give coil designs of lower efficiency, meaning
more wire is required to achieve the specified inductance.
Nevertheless, as this paper will show, the “given piece
of wire” or GPW criterion can be applied to all the well-
known classes of coreless inductor, and the resulting
forms provide the best possible starting point for designs
incorporating other desired features beyond efficient wire
utilization.
For the designer, GPW forms of inductor have simple
scaling properties. For example, in single-layer devices,
the GPW maximum inductance scales with the three-
halves power of the GPW length, and the optimum num-
ber of turns scales with the square root of the GPW length.
A further most desirable feature is inductance stability, or
relative immunity to manufacturing error. Provided the
total wire length is correct, it is possible to have shapes
and numbers of turns with significant errors, yet the effect
on the GPW maximum inductance is small. These fea-
tures again commend GPW forms as the best starting point
for inductance design, for if later stages of the design pro-
cess have to be iterative, the designer can do no better
than start from a solution that is economic, simple, and
stable.
11. NATURAL UNITSAND WIREINDUCTANCES
In this paper all the inductor designs are given in “nat-
ural” or dimensionless units based on the diameter of the
“given piece of wire.” Let the GPW have length W and
external diameter d. Then the dimensionless wire length
is k = W/d, and k typically ranges from a few hundreds
up to some thousands.
The choice of d as the external diameter, measured over
any insulation layer, may possibly seem inappropriate be-
cause the metal conductor diameter governs both the dc
resistance and proximity losses. However, all GPW de-
signs at some point require the closest possible packing
together of the wires, so it is the external diameter that
sets the spacing.
The natural unit of inductance is chosen to be Lo =
p0d/27r henries. This is typically a small unit, for ex-
ample if d = 5 mm, Lo is 1 nH. The smallness presents
no conceptual or practical difficulty. The objective of the
design optimization becomes the ratio L I L O ,which may
be typically many thousands.
The “internal” self-inductance of the GPW, due to the
magnetic field energy stored entirely within the wire if it
remains straight, is po W/8a henries. This is 0.25k in units
of Lo, and such a term appears in the formulas for the
complete inductance in many different geometries. The
“external” self-inductance of the GPW, assumed straight,
is given by [6]
L
- = k{lnk + 0.393). (1)
Lo
261 I
This answer is larger than is obtainable with any single-
loop shapes, essentially because all the mutual couplings
between points of the wire are positive. This result finds
application, for short lengths, in computations of loop in-
ductances [6] by the Method of Sections. However, it is
not of practical interest because the inductance cannot be
measured or used in isolation from other conductors which
have inductances of the same order of magnitude.
The inductance of a single closed turn of wire depends
on the shape. When carrying a current, the mutual mag-
netic forces between all parts of the turn would alter the
shape, if the material was sufficiently flexible, into a plane
circle. For a single turn this is the GPW maximum shape,
with inductance given [7] for large k by
L
- = k {In k - 0 . 8 1 5 3 ) . (2)
Lo
The inductance of single-turn regular polygons is obtain-
able from similar formulas [ 11, for example
L
- = k{ln k - 0.9997) (hexagon) (3)
Lo
L
- = k {In k - 1.2177) (square). (4)
Lo
In general, the inductance of a single turn decreases as
the area A decreases, according to the Bashenoff formula
[I1
where 4 is a term dependent on shape. Some of the indi-
vidual formulas given above are plotted, for comparison,
in Fig. 1.
111. SOLENOID
INDUCTORS
A general feature of inductance formulas, covering most
designs with well-coupled turns, is that inductance value
scales approximately with the mean turn diameter and the
square of the number of turns. As a benchmark suppose
then that the GPW is made into a single circular turn,
providing a simple inductor. Suppose next that the GPW
is rewound into two turns, closely coupled together. This
change increases the inductance by four through the num-
ber of turns, and decreases it by two through the mean
turn diameter, giving an overall gain of about two. Evi-
dently if GPW is rewound into N turns, there is a gain of
about N over the single-turn inductance, except that as N
becomes yet larger the quality of mutual coupling be-
tween turns must degrade, because a large number cannot
all be in close proximity together. This process explains
the physical origin of the optimum number of turns in
GPW inductor designs.
The simple helix, with one layer of wire on a cylindri-
cal former, is cheap and easy to make. For small values
and high current ratings, the former may be withdrawn
2672 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON MAGNETICS, VOL. 25. NO. 3, MAY 1989

105

10‘
0
2
\
J

“
W
c
e
U

103 Fig. 2 . The “Most Economical Coil Shape” among single-layer sole-
U noids.
-c
W

-
c
U

e
0
101

10 -T---

I I I
10 100 1000
Dimensionless Wire Length k=w/d

Fig. 1. Comparison of inductance formulas for straight wires and single

turns.

after winding, for the rigidity of the wire maintains the

shape. To maximize inductance in a GPW design, suc-
cessive turns must be in continuous contact, and such
windings can be analyzed [8] as cylindrical current sheets.
These designs are reviewed by Grover [ 11, who considers
a range of practical examples including the “Most Eco-
nomical Coil Shape” [ l , p. 1611 which is the GPW op-
timum. The solution, illustrated in Fig. 2, has the coil
length 0.408 times the turn diameter. This particular op-
timum design is typical of all GPW designs in that the
inductance maximum, when the number of turns is var-
ied, is very flat. If the length is made 0.39 times the di-
ameter, the inductance is only 17 parts in lo5 below the ‘“a-..._ (e)
maximum, and for 0.42 times the diameter it is only 7
parts in lo5 below the maximum. The optimum number Fig. 3 . Alternative forms of single-layer coils. (a) Clockspring, in rect-
angular section strip. (b) Flat, for printed circuit. (c) Pancake coil, in
of turns is 0.360k1/2and the maximum inductance is given solid round wire (plan). (d) Pancake coil, in solid round wire (section).
by L / L o = 0.661k3/2. The numerical coefficients here (e) Round wires on conical former.
provide a basis of comparison with all the other single-
layer inductor geometries, which all obey the same scal-
ing rules. used, with thick self-supporting copper strip, to make
Alternative forms of single-layer geometry are used for “pancake coils” in power electronics. Formulas are given
special purposes. “Clockspring” coils using rectangular by Grover [l]. Flat spirals usually with square turns,
section strip conductor, with section shown in Fig. 3(a), shown in plan in Fig. 3(b), are used in printed circuits.
have been used in radio-frequency work, sometimes in In the foregoing examples the turns are often well sepa-
closely coupled coaxial pairs so that tuning is possible by rated, either to reduce self-capacitance or to improve
changing the separation. Similar arrangements have been cooling. A GPW design requires compact spiral winding,
MURGATROY D: OPTIMAL FORM FOR CORELESS INDUCTORS
as shown in plan and section in Fig. 3(c) and (d). Cal-
culation of the inductance of these coils [9] uses an equiv-
alent circuit approach. Each turn, with self-inductance Li,
has mutual inductance M?, with all the others, and all the
terms in the summation
N N N
L = C L ; + 2 i =Cl
i= 1
CM,,
j>i (6)
are different. Using series approximations for the M,,the
GPW maximum single-layer solenoid inductance was cal-
culated to be L/Lo = 0.635k3/’ (k I 1000) while for
the flat spiral coil, as in Fig. 3(d), it was L/Lo =
0.631k3I2(k 1 500) with optimum turns N = 0.347k’12.
The similarity of these results, for two quite different ge-
ometries, was not expected, and it prompted inductance
calculations for conical coils, illustrated by example in
Fig. 3(e). The solenoid and the spiral are the limiting
cases, with angle I9 = 0 and I9 = a / 2 , respectively. Cal-
culations [9] showed there is no preferred intermediate
angle, and the GPW inductance falls smoothly through
the range with the k3/’ scaling maintained in all cases.
The single-layer GPW solenoid can be used, approxi-
mately, to indicate the possible gains of inductance if the
same wire is wound into two or more layers. Useful ad-
vantage is expected, because the general level of mutual
coupling must increase, though other properties of the
system, notably capacitance, may also change signifi-
cantly. Starting from a GPW solenoid with N turns, let
the wire be rewound into N & turns in two layers, with
N / h turns in each layer. Both the average turn radius
and the axial length are thereby reduced by h,the coil
maintains the correct ratio of length to (average) turn ra-
dius, N 2 is increased by 2, so the inductance is increased
by h.The argument obviously extends, and the limiting
inductance ideally increases as the square root of the num-
ber of layers, with the proviso that the buildup, or differ-
ence of radii between outermost and innermost layers, re-
mains small compared with the axial length. Detailed
calculations, using the turn-by-turn summation method
mentioned above, confirm these indications, provided the
dimensionless wire length k is large. The results, together
with the optimum number of turns, are plotted in Fig. 4.
It is noticeable, however, that as k is made smaller the
GPW inductance scales more steeply than k3/* and this
trend increases with the number of layers. There is no
simple relationship describing this change. The GPW
maximum inductance for a given k approaches a limit, the
top curve in Fig. 4, which is found by letting the coil axial
length equal the buildup.
The first calculations of the GPW solenoid with
“many” layers, by Gauss [lo] and Maxwell [4] started
from an approximate formula equivalent to
L = poaN2[ln 8a - 2 1
(7)
2613
1000
z
YI
c
L
c
3
c
0
100 ti
E
1
E
a
.-
c
0”
I 00
5
10‘
Dimensionless Wire Length k:w/d
Fig. 4. Maximum inductance and optimal number of turns for air-cored
solenoids.
where a is the mean radius of the turns and b is the self-
geometric-mean-distance of the transverse section, which
Maxwell called the “channel.” For a square channel the
inductance was maximized [4] with the mean turn diam-
eter 3.7 times the side of the square. With a more elabo-
rate starting formula due to Rosa [ 111 of the National Bu-
reau of Standards, Shawcross and Wells [12] corrected
the ratio to about 3.0, but their graph suggests that ratios
of 2.5 and 3.5 give inductance only about 1 percent below
the peak. The last word, in calculations of this type which
do not treat the turns and layers individually, was by
Brooks [SI who found the ratio 2.967, noting that for all
practical purposes 3.0 was good enough, as it provided
inductance only twenty parts in a million below the true
peak. The Brooks inductance formula is
where c is the side of the square channel. In the dimen-
sionless notation of the present paper LB/Lo = 0.318k5l3
with optimum number of turns 0.235k2/3, and these ap-
pear as limiting lines labeled B in Fig. 4.
An alternative approach to the multilayer solenoid,
using the method of individual turns and (6), allows other
channel shapes than squares or rectangles to be studied.
The results [3] suggest that hexagons, which can be made
2614 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON MAGNETICS. VOL. 2 5 . NO. 3. MAY 1989

with regular packing of round wire, give more inductance

than the Brooks square by about 0.9 percent, and that cir-
cles, if such coils could be made, would give an improve-
ment of about 1 . 1 percent. These gains are essentially due
to the removal of wires near comers, where the mutual
coupling to the whole section is weakest. Conversely, it
was found that equilateral triangle sections are inferior to
the Brooks square by about 3 percent. For all these cases
it was found [3] once again that for fixed wire length the
inductance value is remarkably insensitive to the number
of turns, near the GPW optimum designs.

IV. TOROIDAL
INDUCTORS
The principal reason for choosing a toroidal inductor is
the very small external magnetic field. Leakage can be a
problem with solenoids, especially in power electronics
circuits where it can cause interference in nearby equip-
ment. Whereas the external field of a solenoid drops away
approximately as the inverse cube of the distance, that of
a toroid falls much more steeply, and can be made vir-
tually negligible if a reverse loop is used to counter the
one-turn of the winding progression. If economic use of
wire is the first objective of design, then air-cored toroids
need be considered no further. Solenoids have a signifi- Fig. 5 . Two alternative designs of single-layer toroid using the same length
cant advantage, mainly resulting from their use (or per- of wire.
haps it should be called pollution) of the surrounding
space. However, if the desirable properties of toroids are
needed, only the best possible toroids should be used, and
a study of GPW designs is required.
Textbook formulas for the inductance of toroids nor-
mally assume a single layer of fine wires, justifying a cur-
rent-sheet approximation. “Forwards” formulas are eas-
ily derived for any shape of ring section 1131, though
circular and rectangular sections are most widely known
161. A particular shape called the Shafranov D or Prince-
ton D has the property 1141, [15] of maximizing the in-
ductance for a given turn perimeter.
Two alternative GPW designs are illustrated in Fig. 5
where the turns are made to touch along the inner circle Fig. 6 . The optimal window shape for single-layer toroidal inductors
of the structure. If the coil has many turns the inductance
increases as N 2 but is reduced as the turn area is dimin-
ished, and conversely. The optimum GPW windings have of improvement in devices having two layers or more. A
been obtained 1161 with a circular turn window, for which simple argument, similar to that given earlier for sole-
+
L / L o = 0.272k3l2 0.25k and N = 0.817k1/2,and a noids, suggests the limiting inductance increases as the
square turn window, for which L / L o = 0.252k3/2 + square root of the number of layers, together with signif-
0.25k and N = 0.633k’I2.Approximately 15 percent more icant reductions of component volume. Cross sections are
inductance than the circle is theoretically available by indicated in Fig. 7 . Such devices are not easy to wind
using a D-shaped window with ratio of outer radius to neatly, for the layer in contact with the (nonmagnetic) core
inner radius optimized at 5.3. The section is shown in must be evenly spaced if the succeeding layers are to reg-
Fig. 6 . For this, the best of all single-layer GPW toroids, ister correctly. Detailed calculations [ 171 showed that
+
L I L O = 0.314k3/2 0.25k and N = 0.565k1/’. It is in- there are geometrical limits to this particular model, which
teresting to note that all these toroidal designs scale (if restrict the available range of dimensionless wire-length
the small contribution of the “internal” inductance is dis- k. These limits are due to the impossibility of regular
regarded) similarly to the single-layer solenoid. packing in the center, with three or more layers and k
A possible disadvantage of the single-layer toroid is the small, and insufficient space at the outer extremity to fit
large volume of space occupied, and there are prospects all the turns into one layer. In summary, the limits mean
MURGATROY D : OPTIMAL FORM FOR CORELESS INDUCTORS 2675

1ooog
3

IA
0
K
w
gz
z
Fig. 7. Cross sections of two-layer and three-layer toroids. 100 3
5
n

y,
0
that no six-layer GPW design is possible, in this defined
model, and only a small range of five-layer designs is pos-
sible. The inductance of these devices is calculated [17]
from the self-inductance of each layer, and from the mu-
tual inductances between layers. The dimensions of the
lo4
1o3
, I ,,,,,
1o4
,

DIMENSIONLESS WIRE-LENGTH
, , / , , , 1
10’
10

layers are calculated assuming perfect wire-packing ge- k=w/d

ometry, which sets all the spacings and angles. The re- Fig. 8. Maximum inductance and optimum number of turns for air-cored
toroids.
sults for GPW designs are shown in Fig. 8. For large k
the GPW inductance scales as k3/2and as the square root
of the number of layers. Measurements [17] on devices
with up to three layers gave good agreement with the cal-
culations, for inductors wound on solid nonmagnetic cores
and also for an open structure, shown in Fig. 9, of un-
supported wires threaded through holes in an insulating
base.
It is apparent, in Fig. 8, that as the number of layers is
increased the inductance scales more steeply than k3l2.
Since the detailed model with regular packing breaks down
with five or more layers, a completely different approach
is required to investigate a “many-layer’’ model. Irreg-
ular or wild winding can be represented by a filling factor
(fraction of the normal cross section occupied by conduc-
tors), and the winding is regarded as a conductor with
uniform area though varying shape, and uniform current
density. Calculations which concentrate attention on the Fig. 9 . Toroidal inductors with one, two, and three layers: wires are
continuously distributed magnetic field energy, rather than threaded through holes in the insulating plane.
the individual layers of wire [17], suggest a theoretical
upper limiting design, having the section sketched in Fig.
10, which may be regarded as the toroidal counterpart of
the Brooks solenoid. With the optimum ratio of outer to
inner radii, of the air space, at 2.35, the GPW inductance
is L / L o = 0.122k5/3with N = 0.49k2/3.In several re-
spects this result is approximate. Even if the smallest and
first-wound turns were circular, the turns in subsequent
layers would not be so. The model shape is, therefore,
somewhat arbitrary, the best possible shape is not yet
known, and the practicalities of winding would make the
assumed perfect hexagonal packing of wires impossible
it 235
i
to achieve. Notwithstanding these problems, the result is --L
~

conceptually important, both because it has the same scal- i- 2554 U

ing properties as the Brooks Inductor, and because it in- Fig. 10. Longitudinal section of the theoretical optimum GPW toroid with
dicates a fundamental factor of about 2.6 in favor of the many layers of circular turns
2676 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON MAGNETICS. VOL. 75. NO. 3. MAY 1989

TABLE I tice that imperfections of turn shape, or uneven wire com-

THEORETICAL GPW M A X I M UI hM DUCTANCES
(Z,,l = p , , d / 2 ~k, = ~ v / d )
pacting, will result in coils slightly below these theoreti-
cal paradigms, but the shortfalls are often quite small. The
Geometrical Form Inductance/l, Turns results are also expressed in Fig. 11 which, together with
the more detailed graphs for solenoids and toroids, sug-
Straight wire (internal) 0 251 -
gests a simple design method. For any specified coil, the
Straight wire (external) h {Ink + 0 393) -
One circular turn k { I n k - 0 815) I inductance and wire diameter together set the ratio L I L O ,
Single-layer solenoid 0 661k’ ’ 0 360k’ ’ so a horizontal line ruled across Fig. 11, or Fig. 4 or Fig.
Brooks solenoid 0 318k’ ’ 0 235k’ ’ 8, gives the necessary k value and hence the minimum
Single-layer toroids
(circle window) 0 272k ’ ’ + 0 25h 0 8171’ ’ length of wire required, to achieve the specification in
(square window) 0 252k’ ’ + 0 25k 0 633h ’’ each of the various geometries. The optimum number of
(D-shape) 0 324k”’ + 0 25k 0 565k‘ ’
turns is also obtainable graphically, from Fig. 4 or Fig.
Many-layer toroid
(circle window) 0 122k5/’ 049k’ ’ 8.

VI. CONCLUSION
At first sight, the GPW principle may seem inappro-
priate to practical inductor design. However, it has been
shown to provide a common basis for comparison of all
the best available shapes and winding schemes for the im-
portant topologies of coreless inductor. Furthermore, es-
pecially in short-run and prototype manufacture, the GPW
basis gives simple formulas for the minimum required
wire length, and designs that are usefully robust against
manufacturing error. If the wire length is correctly mea-
sured in advance of winding, it is quite difficult to get the
inductance value wrong! The scaling properties of single-
layer and multilayer windings are the basis of straightfor-
ward design methods, graphical or by formula, to solve
the “backwards” design problem directly. The original
objective in the GPW analysis was economic use of wire,
and it is pleasing to note that methods following from that
principle make it easier to get the most economic design
than it is to get any inferior design by trial and error.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Some of the illustrations in this paper are reproduced
by permission of the Institution of Electrical Engineers,
London, UK.

7 I
10‘
Dimensionless Wire Length k=w/d
Fig. 11. Collation of maximum inductance design limits for coreless so-
lenoids and toroids.
solenoid. Comparison of single-layer designs shows a
corresponding factor of about 2.4 in favor of the solenoid.
V. COLLATION OF OPTIMAL FORMS
The inductances of the optimal forms of coreless in-
ductor, all normalized to the common unit Lo = pod/27r
based on the wire diameter, are collated in Table I. For
the standard geometries studied, these inductances rep-
resent the greatest achievable values with a “given piece
of wire” and represent the natural upper limits achievable
with normal coil winding technology. It is likely in prac-
REFERENCES
I
105 [ I ] F. W. Grover, Inductance Calculations. New York, NY: Van Nos-
trand, 1947.
[ 2 ] D. Xu and K . S . Han, “Self-inductance of air-core circular coils with
rectangular cross section,” IEEE Trans. Magn.. vol. MAG-23, pp.
3916-3921, 1987.
[ 3 ] P. N . Murgatroyd, “The Brooks inductor: A study of optimal sole-
noid cross-sections,” Proc. Inst. Elec. Eng. E.. vol. 133, pp. 309-
314. 1986.
[ 4 ] J . C. Maxwell, A Treatise on Electricity and Magnerism, vol. 2 .
Oxford, 1892, Article 706.
[ 5 ] B. Brooks, “Design of standards of inductance and the proposed use
of model reactors in the design of air-core and iron-core reactors”
(Res. Paper 342). J . Res. Nat. Bur. Stand. I , pp. 289-328, 1931.
[ 6 ] B. D. Popovic, Introductory Engineering Electromagnetics. Read-
ing, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1971.
[ 7 ] Lord Rayleigh and A. Schuster, “On the determination of the ohm in
absolute measure,” Proc. Roy. Soc., vol. 32, pp. 104-141, 1881.
181 V. G. Welsby, The Theory and Design of Inductance Coils. Lon-
don, England: Macdonald, 1960.
[ 9 ] S . Gupta, B.Sc. degree thesis, Loughborough University, Dept. of
Engineering Mathematics, 1986.
MURGATROYD: OPTIMAL FORM FOR CORELESS INDUCTORS
C. F. Gauss, Werke, vol. 5 . Gottingen, Germany, 1867, pp. 621-
622.
E. B. Rosa and F. W. Grover. “Formulas and tables for the calcu-
lation of mutual and self inductances,” Bull. Nut. Bur. Srund., vol.
8 , pp. 33-98, 1912.
R. E. Shawcross and R . I. Wells, “On the form of coils to give max-
imum inductance for a given length and thickness of wire,” Elecrri-
cian (UK), vol. 75, p. 65, 1915.
P. N. Murgatroyd, “Some optimum shapes for toroidal inductors,”
Proc. Insr. Elec. Eng. E . , vol. 129, pp. 168-176, 1982.
V . D. Shafranov, “Optimal shape of a toroidal solenoid,” Sov.
Phys.-Tech. P h j s . , vol. 17, pp. 1433-1437, 1973.
J . File, R. G . Mills, and G. V . Sheffield, “Large superconducting
magnet designs for fusion reactors,” IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sri., vol.
NS-18, pp. 205-207, 1971.
P. N. Murgatroyd and D. Belahrache, “Economic designs for single-
layer toroidal inductors,” Proc. Inst. Elec. Eng. E . , vol. 132, pp.
315-318, 1985.
2677
[ 171 P. N. Murgatroyd, “Optimal designs for multilayer air-cored toroidal
inductors with circular windows,” Proc. Inst. Elec. Eng. E . , vol.
135, pp. 202-209, 1988.
Paul N. Murgatroyd was born in Rugby. England, in 1942. He received
the B.Sc. degree in 1964 and the Ph.D. degree in 1971, both from the
University of Bristol, Bristol, England.
Following service in government laboratories he joined the Department
of Electronic and Electrical Engineering at the Loughborough University
of Technology, Loughborough, England, where he is currently Reader and
teaches electromagnetism. He has published over 50 papers on insulators,
magnetic suspensions, statistical topics, and inductor design.
Dr. Murgatroyd is a Fellow of the IEE and a Fellow of the Institute of
Physics.