Lab 11: Transformers

Experiment Report

Name: Caleb Swisher Experiment Date: 11/17/23

Transformer Basics
Table 1: Resistance of Wire
Cylinder Number of turns
Wire diameter Resistance
Diameter of wire
Large Coil 3.4 cm 0.38 mm 1340 25.5 Ohms
Small Coil 3.0 cm 0.67 mm 320 1.9 Ohms

Part 1 Primary Coil has less turns Np < Ns

Paste the Screenshot of the Oscilloscope signals in the space below:

1
Sorry for the poor quality! It looks better if you zoom in

2
 Table 2: Smaller Coil as Primarily Coil
Primary Voltage Secondary Voltage
vp vs
With Core 95.4 mV 136.9 mV
Without Core 33.8 mV 47.7 mV

Voltage Ratio Turns Ratio Efficiency

a n
E = a/n
vs / vp Ns / Np
With Core 1.435 4.1875 .343
Without Core 1.411 4.1875 .337

Calculate the power in the primary and secondary coils with the core in: P = V^2/R
pp = 4.79 mW , ps = .734 mW

Part 2 Primary Coil has more turns Np > Ns

Paste the Screenshot of the Oscilloscope signals in the space below:

3
4
 Table 3: Larger Coil as Primarily Coil
Primary Voltage Secondary Voltage
vp vs
With Core 447.7 mV 20 mV
Without Core 416.9 mV 12.3 mV

Voltage Ratio Turns Ratio Efficiency

a n
E = a/n
vs / vp Ns / Np
With Core .0446727 .239 .189
Without Core .0295034 .239 .123

Calculate the power in the primary and secondary coils with the core in:
pp = 7.86 mW , ps = .211 mW
Questions
1. In Part 1 of the experiment, is the transformer a step up transformer or a step down
transformer? Explain why.
Step up since the secondary has more turns than the primary

2. When the inner coil (with core) was used as the primary coil, was the ratio of the
voltages equal to the ratio of the number of turns? How do you account for any
difference?
The voltage ratio was not equal to the ratio of turns, though it should have been. This is most
likely due to loss of effiency when connecting more and more wires to our non-ideal
components.

3. Why did the secondary voltage change when the iron core was pulled out of the inner
coil?
Since iron is a good conductor, it assisted the flow of flux between the primary and secondary
coils that otherwise would have been lost to outside interference

5. When the outer coil (with core) was used as the primary coil, why is the voltage
stepped down a different amount than it was stepped up when the inner core was the

5
primary coil?
Due to the primary coil having a greater number of turns, its initial voltage will also be greater,
and thus there will be a larger step down than step up in opposite fashion, not to mention some
flux being inherently lost due to working in the unideal, real world.

6. Which had the greater effect: Pulling the core out of the step-up transformer (inner-
primary) or pulling the core out of the step-down transformer (outer-primary)? Why?
Although our values show the opposite, removing the core from the step down transformer
should have had a greater effect due to the core's ability to retain flux that would have
otherwise dissipated. Our inaccurate values could be due to flux travelling from the inside of
the coil out, resulting in a less ideal and efficient angle of contact with the larger transformer.

7. Compare the power from both parts of the experiment. What do you conclude from the
values.
Although it should take less energy to step down as opposed to step up, our values are
indicative of the step down transformer being less efficient.

5. Why did you have to use AC voltage in this laboratory activity instead of DC?
Magnetic fields must be induced by a time varying current rather than a stagnant DC current.