Re: Not enough pimary inductance?

• To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
• Subject: Re: Not enough pimary inductance?
• From: "Antonio Carlos M. de Queiroz" <acmq-at-compuland-dot-com.br> (by way of Terry Fritz <terryf-at-verinet-dot-com>)
• Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1998 21:13:55 -0700
• Approved: terryf-at-verinet-dot-com

Ed Sonderman wrote:

>         If the added tuning inductance is a relatively small fraction of the
> total inductance then the change in k is also small.  Certainly the
> effect is real.

More precisely:
Original transformer:
Primary inductance = L1; Secondary inductance = L2; Coupling coefficient
= k.
The mutual inductance is M = k*sqrt(L1*L2).
Adding another inductor L0 in series with L1 does not change M, but
changes k
because L1 is changed to L0+L1.
The parameters of the equivalent new transformer are then:
Primary inductance = L0+L1
Secondary inductance = L2
Coupling coefficient = M/sqrt((L0+L1)*L2) = k*sqrt(L1/(L0+L1))

Antonio Carlos M. de Queiroz

• Prev: Re: Not enough pimary inductance?
• Next: Re: UK coilers going to pickets lock radio rally?
• Index(es):
  • Main
  • Thread