[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Modeling a magnifier
----------
From: Malcolm Watts [SMTP:MALCOLM-at-directorate.wnp.ac.nz]
Sent: Sunday, March 15, 1998 4:49 PM
To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
Subject: Re: Modeling a magnifier
CORRECTION (sorry)
> Hi Antonio, all,
>
> > From: Antonio C. M. de Queiroz [SMTP:acmq-at-compuland-dot-com.br]
> > Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 1998 10:08 PM
> > To: Tesla List
> > Subject: Re: Modeling a magnifier
> >
> > Malcolm Watts wrote:
> >
> > > It is beginning to look as if a number of aspects of
> > > Antonio's modelling is correct.
> >
> > Well, physics cannot be so wrong... Your system uses L3>>L2, right?
> > (What are the inductance and capacitance values?)
>
> L2 was 355uH, L3 is about 5uH from memory (notes at home).
That should have been 5mH of course :(
A little further information: The driver secondary has a 1:1
aspect (lowest possible Cself for its diameter) and self-resonates at
around 3.5MHz. It is wound with heavy 80-strand LITZ wire. Mean
diameter is about 6.7". Primary/s fit inside.
> > In this condition C2 is small, and the system can only resonate
> > producing beats while the primary is connected, as in the first model
> > that I proposed. As Jim McVey observed, it is impractical to have a
> > distributed C2 such that L2*C2=(L2+L3)*C3, what would produce beats
> > after the opening of the spark gap (second model, with C2), if L2<<L3.
> > There is another possible working behavior for the magnifier, that
> > is the primary/secondary system being used as a CW generator, but
> > most of the members appear to agree that this is practically impossible.
> > (Or not?)
>
> Not in a cap discharge system because the primary decrements as the
> cap empties. No reason why not if the primary is driven from a CW
> source. In this case, system Q limits final amplitude.
>
> Malcolm