Irregular loops with long time constants in CIC conductor

T. Yagai, H. Sato, M. Tsuda, T. Hamajima, Y. Nunoya, Y. Takahashi, K. Okuno

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

8 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

AC losses consist of both regular losses that are proportional to cable twisting pitch squared and irregular losses that could not be estimated from short conductor sample test results. It was explained from our previous works that irregular loops in conductor which are caused by asymmetric strand positions as a result of low void fraction of CIC conductor, produce the losses with long time constants up to several hundred seconds. The observed long time constant indicates that the typical loop length should be about LCM (Least Common Multiplier) of all sub-staged cable pitches, and that contact conditions between the two strands forming the loop should be line contact. In order to investigate the contact conditions in detail, we traced 81 (= 3 × 3 × 3 × 3) strands every 11 mm of CIC sample conductor with 1 m in length whose strands are NbTi/Cu without any surface coating. The measured traces of 81 strands show that asymmetric strand positions, in other words, large displacements of strands from their original positions due to compressing the conductor provide many line contacts. It is found that the averaged line contact length reaches about 10 mm that is three order of magnitude larger than the 10-2 mm of point contact length.

Original languageEnglish
Article number1642977
Pages (from-to)835-838
Number of pages4
JournalIEEE Transactions on Applied Superconductivity
Volume16
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2006 Jun

Keywords

  • CIC conductor
  • Contact resistance
  • Coupling loss
  • Irregular loop

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Electronic, Optical and Magnetic Materials
  • Condensed Matter Physics
  • Electrical and Electronic Engineering

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Irregular loops with long time constants in CIC conductor'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this