Replying to my own post,

On second thoughts the interleaved layering would cause an imbalance,
since not all layers are linked withe same amount of flux, which
brings me to:

L #1 100T Sec
L #2 6T Pri
L #3 100T Sec
L #4 6T Pri

That said, 2 questions again:
#1. Should the Primary be in Layer #1, or is it better to start with
the Secondary ?
#2. Both the Primary and Secondary should be would in the Clockwise
direction itself ? (I hope so)

Thanks,
Manu


On Sun, Mar 17, 2019 at 3:45 PM Manu Abraham <abraham.manu@gmail.com> wrote=
:
>
> Hi,
>
> Looking at a transformer, primary 12T secondary 200T, step-up
>
> The primary is split in two, the secondary in 3, to reduce leakage induct=
ance.
>
> ie,
> 1. L1. Secondary  50T
> 2. L2. Primary  6T
> 3. L3. Secondary  50T
> 4. L4. Secondary  50T
> 5. L5. Primary  6T
> 6. L6. Secondary 50T
>
>
> L1 and L3 (secondary) are at opposite sides of the secondary.
>
> In which case isn't the direction of the flux changing ?
> So, when L1 is wound clockwise, shouldn't L3 be wound in a
> counter-clockwise fashion ?
>
> Am I thinking right, or thoughts in the wrong direction ?
>
> Apart from the original questions, any thoughts on a better
> methodology to reduce leakage inductance ?
>
> Any thoughts ?
>
> Thanks,
> Manu
--=20
http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
.