Re: MOT Experiments

• To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
• Subject: Re: MOT Experiments
• From: "Malcolm Watts" <MALCOLM-at-directorate.wnp.ac.nz> (by way of Terry Fritz <terryf-at-verinet-dot-com>)
• Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 20:14:56 -0700
• Approved: terryf-at-verinet-dot-com

My guess FWIW:

> Original Poster: RWB355-at-aol-dot-com=20
> 
> Hi All,
> 
> I read the last emails on MOT experiments with interest. This pretty much
> covers what I said a while ago that MOT=B4s aren=B4t really short circuit=
>  current
> limited.
> If you compare the magnetic shunts in a NST to those of a MOT you will fi=
> nd
> the CSA of the NST=B4s shunts is much larger.
> 
> Unlike a neon tube a magnetron is obviously not a complete short. My gues=
> s is
> that is why the current limiting on the MOTs is so rotten. They just don=B4=
> t
> need to withstand a full short in normal use.
> 
> NSTs on the other hand must be designed this way, because the U/I curve o=
> f a
> neon tube is positive. This means the more voltage you pump into it, the =
> more
> current the tube will want to take. If no current limiting where used eit=
> her
> the tube or xformer would blow.
> 
> 
> Coiler greets from germany,
> Reinhard

Economies being what they are, the transformers are built as small as 
possible which = least core iron possible while allowing an adequate 
winding window for the copper needed for loaded operation. Inserting 
shunts into these cores just rescues them from blowing fuses on 
magnetizing current draw, bad as the waveforms are. If the shunts do 
not current limit under loading, this seems to be the only reasonable 
explanation of why they exist. The alternative would be a greater 
core leg area.

?
Malcolm

• Prev: MOTs
• Next: DC coil
• Index(es):
  • Main
  • Thread