Pulsing DC 40 volts, 15 amps, about 60 cycles, passing through 13Turn coil over steel core, going to separate load resistor, that has one line wire UNDERNEATH coil also, that is from different circuit of higher voltage, milliamps pulsing, at lower 15 cycles. This 2nd wire acts as a full loop circuit flux secondary side of STEP DOWN transformer of 13 to 1 ratio. Am I to assume this "automatic" secondary #12 gauge single line side has somewhat of an increased current passing through it also , to it's separate low ohms load resistance? (Electromagnet as also being transformer means same time by induction )

 

That explanation leaves me more confused than before I read it. Probably drawing and a better explanation will help. Maybe.

 

Agree with MB2.
Your post is not understandable.

 

NOT ONLY is the collection of words NOT UNDERSTANDABLE, in addition, it's question makes no sense.
There may have been a serious translation error.
I hope that the TS can provide a more detailed explanation of what the actual question is about. Certainly, my understanding of the description of the assembly leads to a question of "WHY???"
What is described does not seem to be a potentially useful arrangement.

 

As understand it, you have an iron core wth 13 turns on it and a single wire from a separate circuit that passes below it.

No, this does not make it a 13:1 transformer. The wire would have to make a loop through the core for that.

The iron core keeps most of the field inside the core, so coupling to the wire outside will be very small. It is doubtful that it would have a significant effect on the second circuit.

 

Starting a post with: " Pulsing DC 40 volts, 15 amps, about 60 cycles, passing through 13Turn coil over steel core, going to separate load resistor, that has one line wire UNDERNEATH coil also "
is in itself leaving out a whole lot of information. Really!!

AND, note that 40 volts and 15 amps describes 600 WATTS of power. So something will be getting rather warm in a hurry.

What russwr needs to provide, in oder to possibly get an accurate and useful answer, is to explain what the goal is, and what results are wanted!

This site does not charge per word posted, and so, providing us with a lot more detail, including the desired results, is much more likely to get a more useful response, and not cost more.

 

Srating a post with: " Pulsing DC 40 volts, 15 amps, about 60 cycles, passing through 13Turn coil over steel core, going to separate load resistor, that has one line wire UNDERNEATH coil also "
is in itself leaving out a whole lot of information. Really!!

AND, note that 40 volts and 15 amps describes 600 WATTS of power. So something will be getting rather warm in a hurry.

What russwr needs to provide, in oder to possibly get an accurate and useful answer, is to explain what the goal is, and what results are wanted!

This site does not charge per word posted, and so, providing us with a lot more detail, including the desired results, is much more likely to get a more useful response, and not cost more.

Rewritten as electromagnet acts as step down transformer same time , if outer wire loop is also added in, from ground to top of electromagnet? If there is series blocking diodes, the applied volts has to be higher than the voltage drop losses, for actual full loop secondary side to pass current.
Only pulsing type DC over separate core wire will induce field in it. Not static field?

 

Rewritten as electromagnet acts as step down transformer same time , if outer wire loop is also added in, from ground to top of electromagnet? If there is series blocking diodes, the applied volts has to be higher than the voltage drop losses, for actual full loop secondary side to pass current.
Only pulsing type DC over separate core wire will induce field in it. Not static field?

With all due respect your telegraphic speech and tortured scenarios are painful to read. This is the sort of thing that gets people riled up. Whether you intend it or not it amounts to trolling.

Schematics, diagrams, photos, and non-abbreviated sentences will go a long way to making these posts not disruptive. Please consider improving the communication.

 

CERTAINLY , adding a second ISOLATED WINDING over, or under, the powered winding of an electromagnet, in a simple "C-FRAME" induction motor has been done commercially, in very cheap record players. But it is done at vastly lower power levels. It works quite well, and certainly at a lower cost.

"Y" has been quite gentle in the criticism of the original post's wording, as I see it.

 

I just want to point it out that pulsing (square wave) on a steel core (high loss) is not considered a good practice, unless you want to heat the steel core. Because the high frequencies components of the square wave act penetrating the core with a depth much less than the fundamental frequency, so it can be laminated, but still it will heat up. If you want to have a high permeability (to have high inductance), you can have a filter to reduce the di/dt passing through this steel-core inductor, but that's just a tip out of my mind, I never did something like this.

 

I also wonder just what it is that the TS was actually asking about! That part is not obvious to me.

 

As understand it, you have an iron core wth 13 turns on it and a single wire from a separate circuit that passes below it.

No, this does not make it a 13:1 transformer. The wire would have to make a loop through the core for that.

The iron core keeps most of the field inside the core, so coupling to the wire outside will be very small. It is doubtful that it would have a significant effect on the second circuit.

Thanks!! You're the only one who answered my question! The 12v pulsing DC 7 amp electromagnet from 2008 document needed the outer wire actually wound on the core one turn. As it was, there was only a magnetic field impressed poorly, with adjacent wire only. Circuit is mainly for putting on required pulsing magnetic field. I suppose also, the number of input Electromagnet turns could be doubled , with just 3.5 amps applied , for same level of magnetic field in steel rod, and keeping same #16 gauge wire. Inductance would be off a hair, but end use is only 34% duty cycle. Enclosing core as full metal loop , instead of linear, may also increase efficiency, such as a small steel ring.

 

I am impressed!!! Bob TPH definitely has the ability to interpret what I certainly could not perceive the meaning of, from that string of words in post #1. AND Bob is correct: That does not describe a transformer, even though it is probably creating a pulsed magnetic field.

 

Thanks!! You're the only one who answered my question!

The others didn't answer because we were trying to discover what this puzzle was. We still don't know what, besides an electromagnet, it is. Why do you need to pulse an electromagnet quick? If you filter that out, the core won't heat up as much.
Also, you're talking about increasing the magnetic flux density, but beware of saturation. This will decrease the inductance and transform your coil into a short-circuit.
Not a single respected engineer would go by guessing what could be done with the current and quantity of loops around the core, unless you already know that it's very low compared to the saturation of the material. Calculate it, or ask for help. Experimenting might cause it to burn/explode.

 

I suppose also, the number of input Electromagnet turns could be doubled , with just 3.5 amps applied , for same level of magnetic field in steel rod, and keeping same #16 gauge wire. Inductance would be off a hair, but end use is only 34% duty cycle.

Inductance is proportional to the quantity of loops squared. So halving the current and doubling the loops isn't going to even things out.