Re: 'Anti-parallel' ?? (fwd)

[<sroys@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 09:59:37 -0700
From: Gomez Addams <gomez@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: High Voltage list <hvlist@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: 'Anti-parallel' ?? (fwd)


On Nov 19, 2004, at 9:51 AM, High Voltage list wrote:

> Original poster: <sroys@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 10:48:12 -0600
> From: Carl Litton <Carl_Litton@xxxxxxxxxx>
> To: High Voltage list <hvlist@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: 'Anti-parallel' ??
>
>
>
>
> I threw this out as part of a larger issue a few days ago and I wanted
> to see if anyone would be willing to hazard a guess as to what the term
> 'anti-parallel' means?  The context is almost always in the wiring of 2
> transformer primaries in parallel in preparation for putting the
> secondaries in series.
>
> One very similar passage referred to wiring the primaries of 2 MOT's 
> 'so
> that they oppose one another.'
>
> The question is:
>
> Is something different from standard parallel wiring being indicated by
> this term or is it just a local terminology variant (most referenced
> articles had apparent source in the UK)?

  As far as I know, the description is a badly chosen phrase which 
simply means to hook the primaries in parallel.  Clearly one needs to 
observe phasing if one wishes to hook the secondaries in series and get 
2X voltage.  If you don't get the expected results, swap the phase 
relationship of the primary connections (vis-a-vis each other).

> I really cannot see any difference whether the 'black' wire is taken to
> the 'righthand' side of both transformers or not.
>
>
> Comments please.
>
>
> Carl Litton
>
>