[Home][2014 Index] Re: [TCML] Was: Raytheon turns ratio too high for sane resonant charging, Now: more reasonabe 50:1 [Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [TCML] Was: Raytheon turns ratio too high for sane resonant charging, Now: more reasonabe 50:1

Hi Jim,
Since you now have access to all the secondary leads, one option would be to reconfigure your power supply using the existing wye (or star) primary, and convert the secondary to delta configuration. If the original wye-connected secondary could deliver 24 kVDC, changing the secondary to a delta connection will result in an output that is 1/sqrt(3) times the original output, or about 58% of the original output. The revised output will be 0.58*24 kV or about 14 kV. You can then connect six diode strings to create a FWB DC output. This is now in a reasonable voltage range for either direct operation or 2X tank cap voltage multiplication using either resonant charging or a charge-reversing (Steve Young) gap. This configuration will also provide you with 58% higher output current (for the same transformer kVA output). 

Bert
--
Bert Hickman
Stoneridge Engineering
http://www.capturedlightning.com
***********************************************************************
World's source for "Captured Lightning" Lichtenberg Figure sculptures,
magnetically "shrunken" coins, and scarce/out of print technical books
***********************************************************************

Jim Mora wrote:

Hi Greg, et al,

I suspect you are right! Actually it is a combination of additive errors-
isn't that the way it usually goes? I back fed winding 1,2 HV with a
measured, while, loaded MOT of 1280v (HV resistor divider) versus
yesterday's 120v feed. Indeed core magnetism is a big issue in this case, as
well. Now I get a more realistic ratio of ~ 50:1 or 208Vin*50 = 10.4KVac out
/ phase. In a perfect world, this test is "supposed" to work in theory for
electricians to get in the ballpark. I do measure, albeit 10x smaller,
voltage on the LV side on other windings which may prove your point. It is
not a balanced system. 10,400 * SQR 2* Sqr 3 = VT fullwave 6 pulse: so
10,400*1.41= 14,664volts(3 pulse)* 1.73=~25.4KV (6 Pulse). This is much more
what was expected tracking backwards from 24KV name tag on the tube tank
considering losses.

So now I have to figure a way to charge the tank with a 6Pulse, up to 25.4KV
DC supply without a 2x resonant inductor. I can tame that voltage down well,
hopefully, with a 3 stack of Powerstat 2156Ds fed 208v 3 phase. Ballast the
primaries? Steve Young has used an arrangement and others with a rotor
designed to charge the tank cap and discharge the tank with another
electrode arrangement. Thinking about this I woke up thinking about an inner
and outer set. I already have a 4" RF choke wound with 1KV Teflon coated
milspec wire for 12 to 16 inches or so.  What extreme power should the
blocking diode (deque) be designed to withstand under oil? I have (500)
UF5408 diodes (3 amp 1KV pk,700Vrms reverse). "Ideas anyone"?

Thanks for putting up with yesterday's rant and the used bandwidth!
Jim Mora

Take heart, I will be shutting up for awhile when I plug in the solder iron
;-^)

-----Original Message-----
From: tesla-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:tesla-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of Greg Leyh
Sent: Sunday, July 06, 2014 11:21 AM
To: tesla@xxxxxxxxxx
Cc: tesla-request@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [TCML] Raytheon turns ratio too high for sane resonant charging

Hi Jim,

I wasn't sure if the three windings share flux like a standard 3-ph
xfmr, or if it's set up as three single-phase xfmrs.  If in fact the
three windings share flux, you'll need to apply 3-ph power [back-fed or
fwd] in order to accurately measure the effective turns ratio.

Cheers,
Greg



_______________________________________________
Tesla mailing list
Tesla@xxxxxxxxxx
http://www.pupman.com/mailman/listinfo/tesla





_______________________________________________
Tesla mailing list
Tesla@xxxxxxxxxx
http://www.pupman.com/mailman/listinfo/tesla