Skip to content

Reluctance

Auto-generated from Reluctance.h with comprehensive documentation

The air gap in a magnetic core is where energy is stored in an inductor. Accurately calculating gap reluctance is essential for predicting inductance and ensuring designs meet specifications.

The magnetic field doesn't pass straight through the gap—it fringes outward, effectively increasing the gap's cross-sectional area. Different models account for this fringing in different ways, with significant impact on inductance predictions.

$$R_{gap} = \frac{l_g}{\mu_0 \cdot A_{eff}}$$

Where $A_{eff} > A_{core}$ due to fringing, and the various models differ in how they compute this effective area.

Available Models

Zhang

Zhang's model (2020) treats total reluctance as parallel combination of internal and fringing:

$$R_g = R_{in} \parallel R_{fr}$$

The internal reluctance handles direct flux, while fringing reluctance accounts for flux spreading around gap edges:

$$R_{fr} = \frac{\pi}{\mu_0 \cdot C \cdot \ln\left(\frac{2h + l_g}{l_g}\right)}$$

Where $C$ is the perimeter of core cross-section and $h$ is winding window height.

Advantages: - Excellent accuracy for typical power magnetics - Simple analytical formulation - Default model in MKF

Validated error: ~3.6% mean deviation from measurements.

Validation Error: 11.6% mean deviation

Reference: Zhang et al. 'Improved Calculation Method for Inductance Value of the Air-Gap Inductor.' CIYCEE, 2020

Muehlethaler

Mühlethaler's 3D approach divides the fringing field into distinct geometric regions, each with its own reluctance contribution:

$$R_{total} = \left(\sum_i \frac{1}{R_i}\right)^{-1}$$

Regions include: - Direct gap path - Corner fringing (4 corners) - Edge fringing (4 edges) - Top/bottom fringing

Best for: - Planar cores with complex geometries - Very large gaps (relative to core dimensions) - Cores with multiple distributed gaps - EI, EE, and planar E cores

Validated error: ~1.4% mean deviation (best accuracy).

Validation Error: 11.1% mean deviation

Reference: Mühlethaler et al. 'A Novel Approach for 3D Air Gap Reluctance Calculations.' ECCE Asia, 2011

Partridge

Partridge's model uses empirical correction factors for fringing:

$$R_g = \frac{l_g}{\mu_0 \cdot A_c \cdot F}$$

Where $F$ is a fringing factor that depends on gap-to-core dimension ratios. Simple and fast for quick estimates.

Validation Error: 12.4% mean deviation

Reference: Partridge, 'Analysis of magnetic circuits with air gaps.' AIEE Trans., 1937

Effective Area

Based on the method described in page 60 from "High-Frequency Magnetic Components, Second Edition" by Marian Kazimierczuk.

Validation Error: 17.5% mean deviation

Reference: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/18227470-high-frequency-magnetic-components?ref=nav_sb_ss_1_33

Effective Length

Based on the method described in page 60 from "High-Frequency Magnetic Components, Second Edition" by Marian Kazimierczuk.

Validation Error: 17.5% mean deviation

Reference: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/18227470-high-frequency-magnetic-components?ref=nav_sb_ss_1_33

Stenglein

Stenglein's model provides improved accuracy for gapped ferrite cores by including detailed geometric factors and validated against extensive FEA simulations. Particularly accurate for E-cores and pot cores.

Validation Error: 14.3% mean deviation

Reference: Stenglein et al. 'The Reluctance of Large Air Gaps in Ferrite Cores.' APEC, 2018

Balakrishnan

Balakrishnan's model uses a permeance-based approach with geometric correction factors. Well-suited for planar magnetics and integrated magnetics applications.

Validation Error: 13.7% mean deviation

Reference: Balakrishnan et al. 'Air-gap reluctance and inductance calculations.' IEEE PESC, 1997

Classic

The classic reluctance formula assumes uniform magnetic field (no fringing):

$$R_g = \frac{l_g}{\mu_0 \cdot A_c}$$

Where: - $R_g$ is gap reluctance (H⁻¹) - $l_g$ is gap length (m) - $A_c$ is core cross-sectional area (m²) - $\mu_0$ is permeability of free space

Limitation: Ignores fringing entirely, leading to overestimated reluctance and underestimated inductance. Only useful for rough estimates or very small gaps.

Validation Error: 28.4% mean deviation

Reference: Standard magnetic circuit theory

Model Comparison

Model Error Reference
Zhang 11.6% Link
Muehlethaler 11.1% Link
Partridge 12.4% Link
Effective Area 17.5% Link
Effective Length 17.5% Link
Stenglein 14.3% Link
Balakrishnan 13.7% Link
Classic 28.4% Link

Model Selection Guide

Core Type Recommended Model Notes
E-cores (standard) Zhang Good balance of accuracy and simplicity
Planar E-cores Mühlethaler Handles wide, flat geometries
Pot cores Zhang or Stenglein Enclosed geometry
Toroids Classic No air gap, or distributed gap
RM cores Zhang Similar to E-cores
PQ cores Zhang or Mühlethaler Choose based on gap size
Very large gaps Mühlethaler >20% of center leg width

Default Recommendation: Use Zhang for most applications. Switch to Mühlethaler for planar cores or when maximum accuracy is required.

Remember: Fringing always reduces reluctance (increases inductance). If measured inductance exceeds calculations, fringing is likely underestimated.

Usage

#include "physical_models/Reluctance.h"

// Create a specific model
auto model = OpenMagnetics::ReluctanceModel::factory(
    OpenMagnetics::ReluctanceModels::ZHANG
);

// Or use the default model
auto model = OpenMagnetics::ReluctanceModel::factory();

Configuring Default Model

auto& settings = OpenMagnetics::Settings::GetInstance();
// settings.set_reluctance_model(OpenMagnetics::ReluctanceModels::...);

Usage

#include "physical_models/Reluctance.h"

// Create a specific model
auto model = OpenMagnetics::ReluctanceModel::factory(
    OpenMagnetics::ReluctanceModels::ZHANG
);

// Or use the default model
auto model = OpenMagnetics::ReluctanceModel::factory();

Configuring Default Model

auto& settings = OpenMagnetics::Settings::GetInstance();
// settings.set_reluctance_model(OpenMagnetics::ReluctanceModels::...);