Paper detail

Ripple field losses in DC biased superconductors: simulations and comparison with measurements

For example in some supercondcuting generators, motors and power transmission cables the superconductor experiences a changing magnetic field in a DC background. Simulating the losses caused by this AC ripple field is an important task from the application design point of view. In this work, we compare two formulations, the $H$-formulation and the minimum magnetic energy variation (the MMEV-formulation), based on the eddy current model (ECM) and the critical state model (CSM), respectively, in simulating ripple field losses in a DC biased coated conductor tape. Furthermore, we compare our simulation results with measurements. We investigate the frequency-dependence of the hysteresis loss predictions of the power law based ECM and verify by a measurement, that in DC use, ECM clearly over-estimates the homogenization of the current density profile in the coated conductor tape: the relaxation of the local current density is not nearly as prominent in the measurement as it is in the simulation. Hence, we suggest that the power law resistivity, used as the \emph{local} relation between the electric field intensity ${\bf E}$ and current density ${\bf J}$ in ECM, is not an intrinsic property of high-temperature superconductors. The difference between the models manifests itself as discrepancies in ripple field loss simulations in very low AC fields with significant DC fields or currents involved. The results also show, however, that for many practical situations, CSM and ECM are both eligible models for ripple field loss simulations.

preprint2014arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access5 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.