Re: MOT to NST "extra transformer" CORRECTION

• To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
• Subject: Re: MOT to NST "extra transformer" CORRECTION
• From: "Malcolm Watts" <MALCOLM-at-directorate.wnp.ac.nz> (by way of Terry Fritz <terryf-at-verinet-dot-com>)
• Date: Thu, 24 Sep 1998 04:07:28 -0600
• Approved: terryf-at-verinet-dot-com

Terry, all,
               I wrote:

> From:           Self <DIRECTORATE/MALCOLM>
> To:             Tesla List <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>
> Subject:        Re: MOT to NST "extra transformer"
> Date sent:      Thu, 24 Sep 1998 14:59:43 +1200

<snip>

> and as the core gets smaller, the inductance must rise to keep Imag 
> from saturating the core. I don't think you'll be much better off
> sizewise. Equations worth noting:
> 
> Magnetizing force = Np*Imag
> Imag = Vp/2*PI*Fmains*Lp
> Lp = k*Np^2                where k is a core induction constant
> 
> If Np halves, Lp quarters and Imag doubles.  

**** That should in fact be Imag quadruples!!! :(  So N*I doubles if
N is halved which is correct. The post otherwise stands.

Sorry,
Malcolm


> Nub of the problem is 
> that the core can only support so many Ampere-turns before it 
> saturates. For good transformer operation the core must be ungapped
> so core area becomes a critical factor (flux density or flux/area^2)
> Effective core length does not greatly influence maximum core flux in 
> an ungapped design and really only exists to allow a winding window
> which in turn allows copper mass for a power rating.
> 
> Malcolm
> 

• Prev: Re: Sparklength inquiry
• Next: Microwave Trannies, how do I rewind them
• Index(es):
  • Main
  • Thread