Re: What efficiency?!

To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
Subject: Re: What efficiency?!
From: huffman <huffman-at-fnal.gov>
Date: Wed, 13 Nov 1996 09:03:34 -0600
    [The following text is in the "ISO-8859-1" character set]
    [Your display is set for the "US-ASCII" character set]
    [Some characters may be displayed incorrectly]

Bert,
I've used Pearson CT's here at work in the past. Some units are very wide
band. One of the tricks they use is in the core material. Two different
core materials within the same package is needed to get the BW. They are
also well shielded against electric fields. You have to pay for all their
dinking around.
Dave

----------
> From: Tesla List <tesla-at-poodle.pupman-dot-com>
> To: Tesla-list-subscribers-at-poodle.pupman-dot-com
> Subject: Re: What efficiency?!
> Date: Tuesday, November 12, 1996 11:25 PM
> 
> > > > Subject: Re: What efficiency?!
> > > Subject: Re: What efficiency?!
> > > > Subject: Re: What efficiency?!
> > Subject: Re: What efficiency?!
> > > > Subject: Re: What efficiency?!
> > > Subject: Re: What efficiency?!
> 
> From hullr-at-whitlock-dot-comTue Nov 12 21:48:06 1996
> Date: Tue, 12 Nov 1996 10:54:28 -0800
> From: Richard Hull <hullr-at-whitlock-dot-com>
> To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
> Subject: Re: What efficiency?!
> 
> Tesla List wrote:
> > 
> > > > Subject: Re: What efficiency?!
> > > Subject: Re: What efficiency?!
> > > > Subject: Re: What efficiency?!
> > 
> > >From bert.hickman-at-aquila-dot-comMon Nov 11 22:08:47 1996
> > Date: Sun, 10 Nov 1996 23:11:42 -0800
> > From: Bert Hickman <bert.hickman-at-aquila-dot-com>
> > To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
> > Subject: Re: What efficiency?!
> > 
> > Tesla List wrote:
> > >
> > > > Subject: Re: What efficiency?!
> > >
> > > >From hullr-at-whitlock-dot-comFri Nov  8 22:24:32 1996
> > > Date: Fri, 08 Nov 1996 11:32:11 -0800
> > > From: Richard Hull <hullr-at-whitlock-dot-com>
> > > To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
> > > Subject: Re: What efficiency?!
> > >
> > > Tesla List wrote:
> > > >
> > Big snip
> 
> 
> > > I got tired of recal.ing the coils, and purchased a wide band Pearson
> > > current monitor recently for $900.00 out of pocket. (ouch)  Good
> > > instruments improve results and reduce hassles.   This is a good one
and
> > > can handle 200,000 amps with a bandwidth of from .5 hz to 4Mhz.  It's
the
> > > cat's pajamas!
> > >
> > > Richard Hull, TCBOR
> > 
> > Richard,
> > 
> > Thanks for a very practical and useful post!! Just what is it that the
> > Pearson has that one of your Rogowski coils doesn't - what do they do
> > differently that justifies $900?
> > 
> > -- Bert --
> 
> Bert,
> 
> The object is to make the coil relatively high inductance,, but remain 
> resonant at very high frequencies and achieve a resonant Q of 
> .00000000000000001. (ultrawide bandwidth-zero resonant rise).  They have 
> a process that is potted in tar and sealed in a solid metal framework.
> 
> 
>   I'm not tearin' in ta' mine fella'!  Not at $900.00!  One might only 
> guess.  They gotta' shoot for maximized losses, zero rise, and infinite 
> bandwidth in a total passive device.  That's why they get the big bucks!
> 
> Richard Hull,  TCBOR