[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: PFC Question
- To: tesla@xxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: PFC Question
- From: "Tesla list" <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 10:42:27 -0700
- Delivered-to: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Delivered-to: email@example.com
- Old-return-path: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Resent-date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 10:43:22 -0700 (MST)
- Resent-from: tesla@xxxxxxxxxx
- Resent-message-id: <H4TkeC.A.KpE.3gNdDB@poodle>
- Resent-sender: tesla-request@xxxxxxxxxx
Original poster: "Dmitry (father dest)" <dest@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Original poster: "Gerry Reynolds" <gerryreynolds@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Hi Dmitry,
> What is needed here is to measure the phase
> of the variac output wrt the phase of the input of the variac to put
> things into perspective.
i guess it`s bad idea - phase shift would depend from the load size
and its character - at the same variac.
> Your estimate of 1mh of leakage inductance
> is based on a coupling of 0.99. This coupling seems high to me. If
> the coupling is say 0.95, the leakage inductance may be significant
> enough to cause the output phase shift.
and it`s a good thought - we have to measure the coupling coefficient.
unfortunately i have got only one variac, so i can`t do it now.
> Another theory that may explain the phase shift vs variac setting is
> the non linarity of the NST (my experience is with NST's).
but it`s already nst (mot, etc) problems, so it`s not so interesting
The solution to no primary hits lay in getting rid of the primary!
This is no joke either.
20-06-96 (c) Richard Hull, TCBOR