4.5 Article

The dependence of AC loss characteristics on the spacing between strands in YBCO Roebel cables

Journal

SUPERCONDUCTOR SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
Volume 24, Issue 6, Pages -

Publisher

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1088/0953-2048/24/6/065005

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. New Zealand Foundation for Research Science and Technology

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Transport AC loss in a short length of 9/2 YBCO Roebel cable, (i.e. with 9 x 2 mm width strands), with 0.25 mm spacers between the strands is measured. The frequency varies from 59 to 354 Hz. The result is compared with the loss for a cable without spacers between the strands. Transport AC loss is decreased by the presence of the spacers. The AC loss reduction due to the extra spacing is more significant when the amplitude of the cable current is small compared to the cable I-c. The losses in the cable with spacers normalized by the square of the cable currents plotted against I-t/I-c approximately agree with those in a cable without spacers. Electromagnetic modelling was carried out for 9/2 and 8/2 cables, modelled as parallel stacks, to assist in understanding the above experimental results. The 8/2 configuration allows the greater use of symmetry to speed computations. Reasonable agreement between the numerical results and the measured results was obtained. This supports suggestions made in previous publications that the transport AC loss in a Roebel cable is roughly equivalent to the loss in two parallel stacks carrying the same current in each tape. The electromagnetic analysis in the 8/2 stacks shows the flux lines are more perpendicular to the strand face when the vertical space between strands is smaller, and this leads to a larger induced electrical field and larger AC loss. At small current amplitudes, the modelling shows the spacing has a strong effect on the AC loss in the surfaced part of the strands.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available