[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Parallel resonant DRSSTC
- To: tesla@xxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: Parallel resonant DRSSTC
- From: "Tesla list" <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 08:01:12 -0700
- Delivered-to: email@example.com
- Delivered-to: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Old-return-path: <email@example.com>
- Resent-date: Fri, 7 Jan 2005 08:01:35 -0700 (MST)
- Resent-from: tesla@xxxxxxxxxx
- Resent-message-id: <kbeWyD.A.TlD.MRq3BB@poodle>
- Resent-sender: tesla-request@xxxxxxxxxx
Original poster: "colin heath" <colin.heath4@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
iv tried both setups but on an induction heater as opposed to a
tesla coil but the same applies. i would think that the main advantage is
with the series resonant is you get natural voltage rise which is proven to
improve performance over current rise (oltc) also in parallel res mode you
need major caps to handle the current
----- Original Message -----
From: Tesla list <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, January 06, 2005 11:54 PM
Subject: Re: Parallel resonant DRSSTC
> Original poster: FutureT@xxxxxxx
> In a message dated 1/6/05 2:27:24 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> tesla@xxxxxxxxxx writes:
> >Hi all,
> >I was curious if anyone has ever tried designing a DRSSTC using a
> >in parallel with the primary rather than in series with it. If something
> >like that could work it would have a big advantage that the extreamly
> >primary current would be between the capacitor and primary, and there
> >be almost no current throgh the switching devices.
> >Has anyone ever thought of something like this, or played with the idea
> >with simulation software?
> >What would be the disadvantage of something like that?
> Hi Sue,
> I would think the parallel tank would present a high impedance to
> the solid state switches giving a poor impedance match.
> It works for tube coils due to the high impedance of tube circuits,
> and the higher voltage supply. Maybe I'm not understanding the
> details of your proposed design?