[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: The "second pig" ballast: Questions.

Original poster: "Bob (R.A.) Jones" <a1accounting@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>


----- Original Message -----
From: "Tesla list" <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, February 07, 2005 5:34 PM
Subject: Re: The "second pig" ballast: Questions.


> Original poster: BunnyKiller <bunikllr@xxxxxxx>
>
> Hey Arron...
>
> xfmr) .
> If you apply a gap ( air gap) to the inductor, you now have less
"magnetic"
> material available, when the same voltage is applied to the coil on the
> inductor, the amount of magnetic flux produced in the core is reduced (
due
> to the gap) soooo  now you need less energy from the coil to reduce (
> reverse) the magnetic flux flow in the inductor. Now you have more power
> available to the item being run on the other end of the inductor....  (
the
> word is reluctance)
>

Actually for the same applied voltage the flux remains constant assuming no
copper loss.
Its the change of flux that produces the voltage.

If you add a gap you need more current for a given flux i.e. the
magnetization current increases.
The applied voltage is equal to the voltage caused by the changing flux or
back emf. assuming no copper losses.


Robert.