Magnetic Material Selection for EMI Filters

Marcin Kącki Marek S. Ryáko John G. Hayes Charles R. Sullivan

Research and Development
SMA Magnetics Sp. z o.o.
Zabierzów, Poland
marcin.kacki@sma-
magnetics.com
Research and Development
SMA Magnetics Sp. z o.o.
Zabierzów, Poland
marek.rylko@sma-
magnetics.com
Power Electronics Research Thayer School of Engineering
Laboratory School of Dartmouth College
Engineering Hanover, NH 03755, USA
University College Cork charles.r.sullivan@dartmouth.edu
Cork, Ireland
john.hayes@ucc.ie

Abstract — EMI filters are widely used in power electronics
converters to meet EMI standards. Since the common-mode
inductor is often the largest single magnetic component, it must
be optimized for size and cost. This paper investigates and
presents datasheet and experimental comparisons of the
magnetic materials aimed for a common-mode choke design.
Several magnetic materials are considered: amorphous iron,
nanocrystalline, ferrite and iron–nickel alloys. The material
analysis compares and contrasts various effects, such as
dimensional resonance, eddy current and core geometry. Finite
element analysis is validated with experimental investigation of
selected magnetic materials: ferrite and nanocrystalline.
Keywords — EMI Filter, CMC Choke, Magnetic Materials,
Impedance analysis.
I. INTRODUCTION
Fast switching semiconductors used in modern switched-
mode power supplies (SMPS) improve efficiency and electric
power quality. Faster switching enables size and cost
reductions. However, high frequency electromagnetic noise
generated during SMPS operation impacts on the converter`s
performance and may interfere with other electronic systems.
Parasitic oscillations are the result of fast voltage (dv/dt) and
current (di/dt) transients. High frequency noise may be
transmitted to other electronic systems as conducted or radiated
emissions. Conducted emissions propagate through resistive,
capacitive and inductive couplings while radiated emissions
propagate through electromagnetic waves. This study is
focused on high frequency conducted emissions only.
Conducted EMI standards define the maximum noise levels
for commercial electronic devices in the frequency range from
150 kHz to 30 MHz. Most countries have adopted the
International Electro-Technical Commission`s (IEC) and
International Special Committee on Radio Interference
(CISPR) [1] standards for conducted EMI. In order to meet
emission standards many solutions are available, such as soft
switching [2], snubber circuits [3], PCB layout guidelines [4]-
[7], low frequency operation, frequency dithering, and, of
course, dedicated EMI filters. The implementation of good
design and manufacturing practices can reduce EMI filter size.
Typically the EMI filter is built of a R, L, C passive
components network. Inductors and capacitors are used to
reject and bypass common-mode noise. The magnetic
component is a key for successful filter design and the filter
attenuation characteristic must be matched with the EMI
source. The variable noise spectrum requires two paths:
common mode and differential mode. The magnetic material
allows to achieve the desired attenuation characteristic. As
discussed in [8] and [9] the ideal material for the EMI filter
choke should have the following characteristics:
• High saturation flux.
• High resistivity as eddy-current losses are
inversely proportional to the electrical resistivity.
• Constant permeability characteristic with
frequency.
• Constant permeability characteristic with
temperature.
• Mechanical robustness and insensitivity to
mechanical stress.
This paper, presents an analysis of the magnetic material
selection for EMI filters. The magnetic material comparison for
EMI filters is presented and followed with a novel impedance
analysis approach. Magnetic materials are compared and
characterized in Section II. Common-mode choke (CMC)
impedance analysis is shown in Section III, while the
experimental validation is presented in Section IV.
II. MAGNETIC MATERIALS
A general specification of the material for EMI choke is
presented in Table I [10]-[20]. The table is based on published
manufacturers information and in-house testing. There are four
different groups of materials: amorphous, nanocrystalline,
ferrites and iron-nickel alloys. Amorphous metals are iron-
based alloys of cobalt, nickel, boron, silicon and manganese.
Amorphous alloys are produced as thin ribbons mainly
available as toroidal cores; however U-cores and blocks are
available as well.
Nanocrystalline material is a two-phase structure consisting
of an ultra-fine grain phase embedded in an amorphous
minority phase. The production process is similar to
amorphous material [8][9]. The annealing process increases the
nanocrystalline material brittleness, and thus limits feasible

978-1-5090-2998-3/17/$31.00 ©2017 IEEE 2350

core shapes to ring cores. The core is usually epoxy coated or Ni-Zn ferrite has a very high resistivity. The core loss is
placed in a plastic enclosure. driven by hysteresis as the eddy current effects are very low.
Therefore, Ni-Zn ferrites are commonly used for MHz range
Ferrites are one of the most popular materials in power applications. Other materials have much lower electrical
electronic applications due to relatively low costs and losses. resistivity, and thus less stable permeability characteristics.
Ferrite is sintered out of iron oxides (Fe2O3) combined with
oxides or carbonates of manganese and zinc (MnZn) or nickel
and zinc (NiZn). These materials are pressed and then sintered
at temperatures of 1,000-1,500 °C, and as a result the ferrites
are hard and brittle [20]. Due to manufacturing process ferrite
cores are available in various shapes.
Iron-nickel alloys are subdivided into two categories: low
nickel content alloys (50-60% Ni) with high saturation flux
density of approximately 1.6 T, and high nickel content alloys
(80% Ni) that exhibit high permeability. The magnetic
properties of these materials depend on the temperature and
thickness. Iron-nickel alloys are sensitive to mechanical stress,
therefore cores are placed in plastic or aluminium enclosures
for protection, and the space between the core and enclosure is
filled with a cushioning material [9]. Some of the alloys of
permeability up to 300,000 are used for magnetic screening.
Nanocrystalline and Fe-based amorphous materials have Fig. 2. Relative permeability vs. frequency based on experimental data.
the highest saturation flux density, followed by iron-nickel
alloys, Co-based amorphous and finally ferrites. Fig. 1 shows The temperature influence on magnetic material properties
the parameter distribution of available materials. Material with is shown in Fig. 3. Nanocrystalline and Co-based amorphous
high relative permeability and high saturation flux density materials are almost temperature insensitive with a
reduces the EMI inductor size as it allows for lower turns and permeability variation of less than 15% for the temperature
thus directly reduces copper losses and capacitance, thus range from -25 °C to 130 °C. The Curie temperature of these
improving filter performance at high frequency. materials is the highest level as shown in Table I, while the
operating temperature is usually limited by the coating or the
plastic core’s enclosure thermal capability. Ferrite materials
show a high temperature dependency and the maximum
operating point is usually limited by Curie temperature.
Thermal behaviour and cooling path have strong impact on
filter size and its attenuation, therefore thermal handling must
be considered during EMI filter design.

Fig. 1. Relative permeability vs. saturation flux density.

Plots of relative permeability as a function of frequency are

shown in Fig. 2. These plots are a mix of published and
experimental data. A magnetic material with the most stable
permeability characteristic is desired for the EMI filter as it
drives energy storage capability. As can be seen, Ni-Zn ferrite
core has the most stable permeability characteristic and is
almost constant up to 500 kHz. Amorphous metal and
nanocrystalline materials have the highest permeability, with
permeability decreasing gradually as frequency increases. For
tested Mn-Zn ferrite permeability drops sharply at a frequency
of about 200 kHz.
Fig. 3. Relative permeability vs. temperature.
Frequency characteristics of initial permeability shown in Fig.
2 may be influenced by geometry, eddy currents and
dimensional resonance. These phenomena can occur in a large
MnZn ferrite core used for high-frequency and high-power
application [22]-[24]. The large core permeability and power

2351
 TABLE I. MAGNETIC MATERIAL PROPERTIES

Measured Relative Permeability

Measured Relative Permeability

Measured Relative Permeability

Thermal conductivity (W/m K)

Saturation Flux Density (T)
Relative Permeability

Continuous operating
Resistivity (ȍ m)
@150 kHz, 25ஈC

@10 MHz, 25ஈC

temperature (ஈC)
Curie temp (ஈC)

Density (g/cm3)
@10 kHz, 25ஈC

@10 kHz, 25ஈC

@1 MHz, 25ஈC
Manufacturer

Composition
Material

Vacuumschmelze Vitrovac 6030F Type

Amorphous Co-Si-Fe 3500 TBD TBD TBD 0.82 365 7.80 1.3x10-6 120 10.5**
-6
Vacuumschmelze Vitrovac 6025 Amorphous Co-Si-Fe 70000-100000 17080 2920 - 0.58 240 7.70 1.4x10 120 10.5**

Metglas Inc. 2605S3A Amorphous Fe-B-Cr-Si 35000 TBD TBD TBD 1.41 358 7.29 1.38x10-6 150 10.0**

Hitachi Metals Magnaperm 2714A Amorphous Co-Si-Fe > 72000 TBD TBD TBD 0.57 225 7.59 1.42x10-6 90 10.5**
-6 *
Vacuumschmelze Vitroperm 250F Nanocrystalline Fe-Cu-Nb-Si-B 4000-6000 4720 3300 763 1.20 600 7.35 1.15x10 180 10.5**

Vacuumschmelze Vitroperm 500F Nanocrystalline Fe-Cu-Nb-Si-B 15000-150000 22500 6633 1268 1.20 600 7.35 1.15x10-6 180* 10.5**
-6 *
Magnetec Nanoperm Nanocrystalline Fe-Cu-Nb-Si-B 5000-200000 14100 3600 - 1.20 600 7.35 1.15x10 200 10.5**

Hitachi Metals Finemet-1M Nanocrystalline Fe-Cu-Nb-Si-B 70000 TBD TBD TBD 1.23 570 7.40 1.1x10-6 180* 10.5**
-6 *
Hitachi Metals Finemet-3L Nanocrystalline Fe-Cu-Nb-Si-B 50000 12700 5300 860 1.23 570 7.30 1.2x10 180 10.5**

Ferroxcube 3S5 Ferrite Mn-Zn 3800 4100 3080 15 0.54 255 4.80 10.00 180* 3.5-5

Ferroxcube 3E27 Ferrite Mn-Zn 6000 12050 24 - 0.43 150 4.85 0.50 140 3.5-5

Ferroxcube 3E10 Ferrite Mn-Zn 10000 10620 105 - 0.46 130 5.00 0.50 125 3.5-5

Ferroxcube 3E12 Ferrite Mn-Zn 12000 10620 105 - 0.47 130 5.00 0.50 125 3.5-5

DMEGC R15K Ferrite Mn-Zn 15000 8400 80 - 0.36 110 4.90 0.05 110 5.0

DMEGC R10KZ Ferrite Mn-Zn 10000 11000 142 - 0.38 120 4.90 0.15 115 5.0

DMEGC R10K Ferrite Mn-Zn 10000 9230 451 - 0.40 120 4.90 0.15 120 5.0

Ferroxcube 4B1 Ferrite Ni-Zn 250 245 245 240 0.36 250 4.60 105 180 3.5-5
5
Ferroxcube 4S60 Ferrite Ni-Zn 2000 2080 1340 210 0.26 100 5.00 10 100 3.5-5

MAGNETICS Supermalloy Iron-Nickel Ni-Fe-Mo 70000-100000 TBD TBD TBD 0.82 460 8.70 0.57x10-6 180* TBD
-6 *
MAGNETICS Permalloy 80 Iron-Nickel Ni-Fe-Mo 20000-50000 TBD TBD TBD 0.82 460 8.70 0.57x10 180 TBD

VEB Auerhammer Nifemax 40 Iron-Nickel Ni-Fe 80000 TBD TBD TBD 1.25 450 TBD 0.57x10-6 180* 10.0**
*Limited by coating or core box material, ** Along lamination

loss characteristic may differ from the data provided in Plots of real and imaginary permeability as a function of
manufacturer’s specification. In order to show this dependency frequency for various core size and temperature are shown in
an example based on a 3 core sizes, TX29, TX50 and TX80 of Fig. 4. and Fig. 5, respectively. As it can be seen core with
outer diameter 29 mm, 50 mm and 80 mm, respectively, is external diameter of about 80 mm at 100°C exhibits a
selected. Detailed cores dimensions are presented in Table II. significant change of permeability characteristic, real
TABLE II. TESTED CORES permeability rolls-off at a frequency of about 10 kHz.

Parameter Unit TX29 TX50 TX80

A. Core skin effect
Dimensions The core size and operating frequency has a strong impact
mm 29x19x15 50x31x19 80x45x30
OD x ID x H on the flux distribution. The toroidal core with external
Core cross
diameter of approx. 25 mm is large enough to exhibit non-
mm2 75 180.5 525 uniform flux distribution due to skin effects, albeit eddy current
section
effect is usually considered to be insignificant in the ferrite
Core volume cm3 5.65 22.96 103.08 core. In a ferrite core at high frequency, the magnetic field
produced by eddy current and displacement current displaces
the magnetic flux from the inner portion of the core cross-

2352
section. This results in a flux skin effect analogous to the TABLE III. VARIOUS MATERIAL SKIN DEPTHS BASED ON DATA PROVIDED BY
electric current skin effect in the winding. FERRITE MANUFACTURERS

MnZn Ferrite

MnZn Ferrite

NiZn Ferrite
Aluminum
Copper
Permeability μr 1 1 10000 6000 250

Conductivity ı (S/m) 5.96 x 3.5 x

0.5 0.5 0.00001
@ f = 0.1 MHz 107 107

Conductivity ı (S/m) 5.96 x 3.5 x

2 2 0.00002
@ f = 1 MHz 107 107

Conductivity ı (S/m) 5.96 x 3.5 x

10 10 0.0001
@ f = 10 MHz 107 107

Fig. 4. Real permeability vs. frequency based on experimental data. Skin depth (mm)
0.20 0.26 22.5 29.05 31830
@ f = 0.1 MHz
Calculated skin depth for copper, aluminium, Mn and NiZn Skin depth (mm)
ferrite are presented in Table III. The Table III shows that with 0.06 0.08 3,55 4,59 7117
@ f = 1 MHz
the increase of the conductivity and permeability the flux skin
effect becomes more significant. Skin depth (mm)
0.02 0.026 0.50 0.64 1006
@ f = 10 MHz

Fig. 6 shows magnetic flux density change in the core

along the radius fraction. For analysis performed at 10 kHz the
magnetic field intensity is stronger at the inner side of the core
while reduced at the outer surface. Analysis results for 1 MHz
look similar to classical current distribution in a round
conductor, flux is concentrated more around inner core surface
and flux density is weakening in the core center. Non-uniform
flux distribution can lead to localized magnetic saturation,
reduced permeability and substantially higher losses.

Fig. 5. Imaginary permeability vs. frequency based on experimental data.

Flux skin depth is a function of the frequency, it drops as

frequency increases. The skin depth, į, depends on material
conductivity, permeability and frequency in the following
manner:
1
δ= (1)
ȝ 0 ȝ r fıʌ
Where:
į – the skin depth in m
ı – material conductivity in S/m
Fig. 6. FEA modelling of field distribution in the core.
f – frequency in Hz
μ0 – absolute permeability (4ʌ10-7 H/m) B. Dimensional resonance
μr – relative permeability The dimensional resonance is present in the core where the
physical dimension is greater than half of the wavelength.
Since the MnZn ferrite has a high dielectric constant and high
permeability, therefore the electromagnetic wave propagation
through the material is lower than in the free space. The

2353
wavelength difference leads to the electromagnetic wave phase
difference on the magnetic material’s surface.
The dimensional effect impacts the series impedance that
changes from inductive at low frequencies to resistive as the
resonance is developed. Intuitively, core size reduction as
frequency increases allows avoiding dimensional resonance.
The resonance dimension, DR, is a function of the frequency,
resistivity, permittivity and permeability as follows:
v c
DR = =
2f 2 Z = jȦL S + R S = jȦL 0 (ȝ 'S − jȝ 'S' )
§ 1 · (2)
2 f ȝ r İ 2r + ¨¨ ¸¸
© ȡȦİ 0 ¹ ȝ 0 N2A
Where:
c – is the speed of light in a vacuum (300 000 m/s)
İ0 – absolute permittivity (8.85x10-12 F/m)
İr – relative permittivity
Ȧ – 2ʌ x frequency
The resonance dimension is calculated for MnZn and NiZn
ferrites as function of frequency and presented in Fig. 7. To
avoid dimensional resonance at a given frequency the smallest
cross-sectional dimension of the core must be less than half of
DR at that frequency. For example, a NiZn ferrite with relative
permeability of about 250 and permittivity less than 50 moves
the dimensional resonance beyond the considered frequency
range.
Laminated structures, such as amorphous, nanocrystalline
and iron-nickel alloys reduces eddy current and dimensional
resonance effect by breaking the conduction path into many
high-resistance paths. The practical minimum lamination’s
thickness is an only limit for the design.
Fig. 7. Dimensional resonance in MnZn and NiZn ferrites.
III. IMPEDANCE ANALYSIS
The filter must meet the impedance requirement based on
the converter’s analysis. It is usually provided as a frequency
characteristic of the impedance modulus. Therefore, the
requirement does not specify detailed components of the
impedance, and thus, the required components impedance is
not singular and has a plurality of solutions.
2354
The CMC parameters are adjusted by a combination of
magnetic material selection with turns number and geometry,
and associated parasitic parameters. The impedance may be
modelled by number of approaches, as can be found in
literature [25]-[27]. Usually, magnetic material manufacturers
specify the complex permeability characteristic. The complex
permeability is expressed by its real (inductive) component μ'
and imaginary (loss) component μ". The relation of the
complex impedance can be represented by the series model
based on complex permeability in a following manner:
ȝ '' (3)
L0 = ; tan δ m = 'S
l ȝS
where R and L are the series resistance and inductance of the
S S
circuit, respectively, and are used for measured components
separation as presented in Fig. 8. Power losses are expressed as
tangent of the loss angle į . Lo is the parameter that defines coil
m
configuration.
Fig. 8. Equivalent circuit for series representation of complex permeability.
An impedance analysis was performed using Maxwell 3D
Finite Element Method (FEM) for two CMC variants: one
based on 3E27 ferrite and the other on a nanocrystalline
Vitroperm material. Fig. 9 shows the complex permeability and
loss tangent vs. frequency used for these materials. The FE
calculation uses the eddy current field and electrostatic solver.
The electrostatic solver provides the parasitic capacitance of
the choke while the eddy current solver deals with the
frequency dependent effects such as inductance and eddy
current, skin and proximity losses in the winding, and the eddy
current and hysteresis losses in the core. The FEM model of a
three-phase common mode choke is illustrated in Fig. 10.
Fig. 9. Material characteristic for FEM simulations.
 the material selection on the impedance characteristic a hybrid
core is introduced that combines properties of both Mn-Zn and
Ni-Zn ferrite material. Similarly sized Mn-Zn ferrite and Ni-Zn
ferrite cores are side by side in the hybrid core. Fig. 13 presents
the experimental results. Constant turns number, single layer
winding applied for all designs decreasing the winding
influence on filter attenuation characteristic and exposes the
impact of magnetic material.

TABLE IV.CMC PARAMETERS

Parameter

Design 2

Design 3
Design 1
Unit
Fig. 10. FEA CMC a) simulation model, b) DM magnetic flux distribution, c) Mn-Zn +
CM magnetic flux distribution. Mn-Zn
Core material - NiZn Vitroperm
Ferrite
Ferrite
Fig. 11 shows the impedance frequency characteristic of the Total core
dimensions mm 50x30x23 50x30x25 50x40x20
two CMCs for a generic impedance requirement. Typically, the
OD x ID x H
requirement is provided as an impedance modulus vs. Material 10 000 +
frequency while the CMC design provides complex parameters - 10 000 22 000
permeability 2 000
of impedance based on a series model as in Fig. 8. Since the Core cross
mm2 230 250 100
component is of inductive character, the impedance section
requirement is limited to a first quadrant of the Cartesian plane. Core volume cm 3
28.9 31.4 14.1
While the impedance absolute value is constant for a given
frequency, there are an infinite number of solutions that form a Number of turns - 5/phase 5/phase 5/phase
quarter of the circle with radius equal to the impedance 2 x 1.8 mm 2 x 1.8 mm 2 x 1.8 mm
absolute value. The ratio of the real and imaginary part sets the Wire type - DN2E200 DN2E200 DN2E200
Cu wire Cu wire Cu wire
attenuation characteristic. The reactive power may be a source
of further oscillations at higher frequencies, while the real part CM inductance μH 510 500 520
is limited by the maximum power loss of the component. The CM saturation
A 1 1 1
imaginary part depends on the magnetic material properties current
and it is proportional to the inductive part of complex DM inductance μH 2.65 2.58 1.8
permeability. The analysed designs are mapped onto the
Rated DM
impedance plane. The preferred design is based on the current
A 35 35 35
material, core geometry, winding turns, and associated
parasitics. DC resistance mŸ 2.43 2.52 1.83

Fig. 11. CMC Impedance vs. frequency based on FEM simulations.

IV. EXPERIMENTAL VALIDATION

Three common mode chokes were simulated and then built Fig. 12. Photo of CMC chokes used for calculation validation.
and experimentally tested. The impedance characteristics were
measured with a Wayne Kerr 6550B analyser. The tested CMC
chokes are shown in Fig. 12 while the basic parameters are
presented in Table IV. In order to demonstrate the influence of

2355
 [5] H.W. Ott, “Noise Reduction Techniques in Electronic Systems,” John
Wiley and Sons, 1988.
[6] H.W. Ott, “Electromagnetic Compatibility Engineering,” John Wiley
and Sons, 2009.
[7] P. Bardos, “Predicting the EMC performance of high-frequency
inverters,” IEEE Applied Power Electronics Conference, 2001, pp. 213-
219.
[8] Alex van den Bossche, Vencislav Cekov Valchev, “Inductors and
Transformers for Power Electronics,”, 2005.
[9] M. K. Kazimierczuk, “High-Frequency Magnetic Components,” John
Wiley and Sons, 2009.
[10] H. Schwenk, J. Beichler, W. Loges, Ch. Scharwitz, “Actual and future
Developments of Nanocrystalline magnetic materials for Common Mode
Chokes and Transformers,” PCIM Europe 2015.
[11] Georgi T. Nikolov, Vencislav C. Valchev, “Nanocrystalline magnetic
materials versus ferrites in power electronics,” The 6th International
Conference on Mining Science & Technology.
Fig. 13. CM insertion loss for different designs. [12] A. Roc`h, R. Iannarelli, F. Leferink, “New material for inductors,”
International Symposium on Electromagnetic Compatibility – EMC
Europe, 2009.
CM choke with Mn-Zn ferrite in comparison to
[13] Marek S. Rylko, Kevin J. Hartnett, John G. Hayes, Michael G. Egan
nanocrystalline core has a better performance in the lower “Magnetic material selection for High Power High Frequency Inductors
frequency range. Hybrid core with about the same geometry as in DC-DC Conversion,” Twenty-Fourth Annual IEEE Applied Power
Mn-Zn core shows significant improvement of attenuation Electronics Conference and Exposition, 2009.
characteristic in frequency range between 2 and 30 MHz. Due [14] www.hitachi-metals.co.jp
to the good overall characteristic combination properties of [15] www.ferroxcube.com
both Mn-Zn and Ni-Zn ferrite it fits best for this EMC filter [16] www.vacuumschmelze.de
application. [17] www.chinadmegc.com
[18] www.magnetec.de
V. CONCLUSIONS [19] www.metglas.com
[20] www.auerhammer.com
Magnetic material selection for EMI filters has been
presented. Four groups of magnetic materials are compared and [21] D. Bhalla, DK. Singh, S. Singh, D. Seth,” Material processing
technology for Soft Ferrites Manufacturing ,“American Journal of
contrasted. The EMI filter specification typically provides the Materials Science 165-170.
frequency characteristic of the impedance modulus and this [22] R. Severns, E. Yeow, G. Woody, J. Hall, J. G. Hayes “An ultra-compact
specification is used to define the inductor. However, the transformer for a 100 W to 120 kW inductive coupler for electric vehicle
impedance character may be adjusted. Three CM inductors are battery charging,” Power Electronics Conference and Exposition 1996,
designed, simulated and built. Experimental result shows that APEC ‘96.
the inductor characteristic can be adjusted by combining [23] Glenn R. Skutt, Fred C. Lee, “Characterization of dimensional effects in
materials of different properties. ferrire-core magnetic devices,” 27th Annual IEEE Power Electronics
Specialists Conference, 1996.
[24] Y. Sakaki, T. Matsuoka, M. Yamaguchi, “Effect of dimensions on
REFERENCES power losses in Mn-Zn ferrite cores,” IEEE Translation Jurnal on
Magnetic in Japan, Vol. TJMJ-, 1985.
[1] www.iec.ch [25] A. Majid, J. Saleem, K. Bertilsson, “EMI filter design for high
frequency power converters”, 11th International Conference of
[2] H. Chung, S. Hui, K. Tse, "Reduction of power converter EMI emission Environment and Electrical Engineering, 2012.
using soft-switching technique," IEEE Trans. Electromagn. Compat.,
vol. 40, p. 282–287, Aug. 1998. [26] K. Nomura, N. Kikuchi, Y. Watanabe, S. Inoue, “Novel SPICE model
for Common Mode Choke including complex permeability,” IEEE
[3] X. Wu, J. Yang, H. Chen, Z. Qian, "Analysis and design considerations Applied Power Electronic Conference and Exposition (APEC), 2016.
for EMI and losses of RCD snubber in flyback converter," in Proceeding
of Twenty-Fifth Annual IEEE Applied Power Electronics Conference [27] Kovacic, Z. Hanic, S. Stipetic, S. Krishnamurthy, and D. Zarko,
and Exposition, Palm Springs, CA, 2010. ‘‘Analytical wideband model of a common-mode choke,’’ IEEE Trans.
Power Electron., vol. 27, no. 7, pp. 3173---3185, Jul. 2012.
[4] A. Bhargava, D. Pommerenke, K.W. Kam, “DC-DC buck converter
EMI reduction using PCB layout modification” IEEE Trans.
Electromagn. Compat., vol. 53, p. 806–813, 2011.

2356