[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Coupling - ACMI trend
Original poster: "Barton B. Anderson by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-uswest-dot-net>" <tesla123-at-pacbell-dot-net>
sorry to reply late on this one.
Tesla list wrote:
> Original poster: "by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-uswest-dot-net>"
> Barton B. Anderson <tesla123-at-pacbell-dot-net> wrote:
> > I took your new secondary diameter and misc. other details refining
> > data inputs to achieve as near a model as your coil should be via
> > dimensions and measurement.
> I don't know what refinements your're making here, other than putting
> in Terry's latest dimensions and converting units. The temptation to
> tweak the input measurements to get better agreement must be resisted.
The refinement was to identify true turns on Terry's coil. Given basic
dimensions as was the first case, the turns were way off unless there was some
amount of spacing (much larger on his coil compared to my own). Comparing Ls
(meas vs. calc), Terry must have had quite a lot more spacing between turns
than a typical closewound coil. I figured it out to within 0.0001" as was shown
in his latest detailed measurements (by comparing meas vs. calc inductance). My
turns were off by only 3 (997), so it was a very close representation his
This is just a check to see if measurements were close to what they should be
(and they were). Acmi got the measured dimensions. I specifically went through
this check because because Terry said it was ~1000 turns and later in a post to
John C., mentioned it might be a few over as John had calc'd. It ended up at
1000.5 turns. Once I changed the spacing value by 0.0001", I calc'd 1000.7
turns. Terry's details proved a high degree of accuracy of how I calc Ls
against physical dimensions.
But no worry's, these are just checks I'm making for myself. Acmi gets measured
dimensions of course.
Terry'sj coil and my own are good representations as far as dimensions in acmi.
Marco's is not (yet).