[Home][2015 Index] Re: [TCML] Question for solid-staters [Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [TCML] Question for solid-staters



Hi Ken,

A Primary:Secondary k of 0.4 may be somewhat problematic from an insulation standpoint. It's comparable to the coupling used in magnifier driver transformers, and these can be prone to P:S flashovers with air insulation.

Try loosening the P:S coupling to 0.2 - 0.3 and extending the simulation time to 2-3 msec to allow the secondary to ring up over a longer time. You may be able to achieve similar voltage output without the need for excessively high coupling coefficients (and potentially heroic field control and insulation techniques).

Bert

Ken Herrick wrote:
More accurately, Re: Question for single-resonance solid-staters--of
which there seem to be mighty few still around.

Having been involved in deciding on series or parallel single-resonance
with synchronized primaries (from secondary feedback), I've received
good advice recently but have thought to make a simple simulation to
further pursue it.  Ref. the following link.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/28799314/TCRB3/KCH-Screenshot%20-%204_24_2015.jpg


Two anti-phase drives of 300V each drive 2 identical primary coils. The
transformer is a simulation of a Tesla coil (with the secondary
inductance of my actual coil) and its top-load.  The secondary Fr is
what's calculated for those L & C values--absent any primary influence.

In the chart, I started out at primary:primary k = 1 and
primary/primary:secondary k = 0.8.  Ran a 1ms simulation, measured the
maximum, entered that into the chart, etc.  Finding 35KV as the maximum
in that column, I proceeded leftward then upward similarly, reaching the
sweet spot of the one k = 0.9 and the other, 0.4.  I then set R1 to
100K, just the once, and ran that again.  That seemed to show that
paralleling primaries closely together and setting a rather loose
coupling to the secondary yields the best response (and the easiest way
to do it).

I just note I made an error on the chart, substituting +144K for *144K
in the notation.  Won't bother changing it...

This seems to further tell me that I don't have to series the primaries
to create 1 effective coil but rather can configure them just physically
& electrically in parallel.

Comments, anyone?

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



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