Sunteți pe pagina 1din 3

Transformers: Turns ratio, voltage ratio and current ratio

If there are N1 turns on the primary of a transformer and N2 turns on the secondary we
observed that the ratio of voltages V2/V1 is approximately N=N2/N1 but that the ratio of
currents I2/I1 is not 1/N. What’s up?

Here is the circuit that we used.

In the lab the value of the resistor in the secondary is R = 10 ohms.

The equations governing the transformer are given in the ECE 0031/0041 text (Dorf 7th
edition page 523, 8th edition page 523. There are several sign differences, due to the
direction of coupling, between the paragraphs below and those used in the 8th edition of
Dorf).

The governing equations are

v1 = L1 di1/dt - M di2/dt

v2 = - L2 di2/dt + M di1/dt

where L1 and L2 are the inductances of the primary and secondary and M is the mutual
inductance. M = k [L1L2]1/2 and k is a coupling coefficient 0<k<1.

Notice that the direction taken for i2 is opposite to that which would be used to write the
voltage across a stand-alone inductor L2. The direction of i2 accounts for the two minus
signs in these equations.

The phasor form (sinusoidal steady-state) of these equations is


v1 = jω L1 i1 - jω M i2 (1)

v2 = jω M i1 - jω L2 i2 (2)

The voltage ratio is therefore

v1/v2 = [L1 i1 - M i2]/[ M i1 - L2 i2 ]

If the coupling is nearly perfect, k=1 and M = [L1L2]1/2

Substituting this expression for M:

v1/v2 = [L1 i1 - (L1L2)1/2 i2]/[ (L1L2)1/2i1 - L2 i2 ]

= [L1/L2]1/2 = 1/N or v2 = Nv1 (as expected).

Note that this equation implies that not only are v1 and v2 related by the turns ratio N but
also says that there is no phase difference between these two voltages.

We can also use KVL in the secondary circuit. This will include the effects of resistance
R (in our experiment 10 ohms).

KVL v2 = i2 R or using Eq. (2) jω M i1 + (-jω L2 –R)i2 = 0 (3)

We can use equation (1) and (3) to solve for i1 and i2

v1 = jω L1 i1 - jω M i2 Eq. (1)
0 = jω M i1 + (-jω L2 –R)i2 Eq. (3)

Therefore (Cramer’s rule)

i1 = v1 (-jω L2 –R)/[ (jω L1) (-jω L2 –R) + (jω M)2]

i2 = - jω M v1/[ (jω L1) (-jω L2 –R) + (jω M)2]

for perfect coupling; M = [L1L2]1/2 or M2 = L1L2 and

i1 = v1 (-jω L2 –R)/ (-jω L1R) = v1 (L2/L1 )(1/R) + v1/(jω L1) = v1N2/R + v1/(jω L1) (4)

i2 = -jω [L1L2]1/2 v1/(-jω L1R) = [L2/L1]1/2 v1 / R = Nv1/R (5)


The secondary current is the secondary voltage divided by R. The secondary current is in
phase with the primary voltage (which is in phase with the secondary voltage).

Note that in general the primary current is not in phase with the primary voltage.
[However if the primary inductance is large i.e. if ω L1 >>>R/N2 then i1 = v1N2/R
or (from equation 3) i2/i1 = 1/N.] For most transformers (but not for the transformer in
the lab) this inequality is satisfied. For the lab experiment ω L1 = 2π (400 Hz) 0.01 H =
25 ohms and R/N2 is approximately 10/ 0.16662 = 360 (60 turns on primary, 10 turns
on secondary) and the inequality is not satisfied. There is a simple physical
interpretation to Eq. (4). The primary current has two components; one is due to the load;
one is due to the inductance of the primary winding. We can view the load (reflected to
the primary) and the primary inductance as elements in parallel and equation (4) is then a
statement of KCL. If the inductance of the primary is large, the equations reduce to
those that we anticipated.

Pspice has the capability of modeling a transformer where the inductances of the
windings are small. Our transformer can be accurately modeled in Pspice.

Mike Gorham, a student in ECE 1201 a few years ago, took a picture of primary voltage
(trace one), primary current (trace 2) and secondary voltage (trace 3) for the transformer
that he made in the lab. The picture is copied below.

Notice that the primary and secondary voltages are in phase and that the primary current
(actually the voltage across a small resistor in the primary circuit) is not in phase with
these voltages.

File updated (typos corrected): November 20, 2006, update November 26, 2007. Update of references to Dorf, November 28, 2011,
correction to equation 4 November 28, 2011

S-ar putea să vă placă și