Re: JavaTC 7.05 Program (was Space winding question)

["Tesla list" <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>]

Original poster: "Barton B. Anderson by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-uswest-dot-net>" <tesla123-at-pacbell-dot-net>

John C.,
Thanks for taking a look at the program. I agree with your comments and the
differences noted.

Take care,
Bart

Tesla list wrote:

> Original poster: "John H. Couture by way of Terry Fritz
<twftesla-at-uswest-dot-net>" <couturejh-at-worldnet.att-dot-net>
>
> Bart -
>
> I checked your JavaTC 7.05 Program and now our programs are in agreement as
> they should be because they are using the same equations. I also checked
> your program when a spacewound coil is used and found no problem. However,
> there are some important differences in how the two programs are used that
> should be noted. Both programs have advantages and disadvantages that can
> make them easier to use for the coiler.
>
> The JavaTC 7.05 uses the "Spacing between turns" but with the JHCTES you
> have to calculate this parameter. As an example, if your coil is
>
>     #30 AWG - .01 dia - 1 mil insulation - 60 TPI - 19 inches long
>
> This is a spacewound coil because
>
>      Overall dia = .01 + 2(.001) = .012
>
>      TPI x Overall Dia = 60 x .012 = .72 (<1) (spacewound)
>
> To find the spacing between the insulation at each turn
>
> The spacing is  1/TPI - Overall Diamater
>
>      Spacing = 1/60 - .012 = .0047 = 4.7 mils
>
> John Couture
>
> -----------------------------
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tesla list [mailto:tesla-at-pupman-dot-com]
> Sent: Sunday, March 18, 2001 2:13 PM
> To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
> Subject: Re: Space winding question
>
> Original poster: "Barton B. Anderson by way of Terry Fritz
> <twftesla-at-uswest-dot-net>" <tesla123-at-pacbell-dot-net>
>
> Hi John C.,
>
> Tesla list wrote:
>
> > Original poster: "John H. Couture by way of Terry Fritz
> <twftesla-at-uswest-dot-net>" <couturejh-at-worldnet.att-dot-net>
> >
> > Bart -
> >
> > For #30 AWG - 1 mil insulation - closewound - 19" long
> >
> > The JHCTES Program
> >   Bare wire dia          .01"
> >   Insul Thick            .001"  (1 mil)
> >   Overall dia = .01 + 2(.001) = .012" dia
> >   Wire c/c    = .012"
> >   Spacing     = 0  (closewound)
> >   TPI = 1/.012 = 83.3 Turns per inch
> >   Turns = TPI x length = 83.3 x 19 = 1582.7 Total coil turns
> >
> > To get this same result with your Java TC Designer Program I used .01 for
> > the bare wire, .002 for the insulation (to get the same result), and 0 for
> > the spacing because of coil being closewound.
>
> Ok John, I now understand what you were getting at. Your right, JavaTC
> should have included 2 * the insulation
> factor. The reason it didn't was a typo mistake on my part when writing the
> code. It is modeled after my Excel
> version of JavaTC which does include each side of the insulation. Thank you
> for pointing out the mistake. All
> of my calc's have "always" included the insulation factor correctly and I
> thought I had it in there. This is
> why I didn't understand what the problem was. Anyway, I have updated JavaTC
> to version 7.05 to correct the
> insulation error. It now calcs the "above" parameters correctly. Take a
> look if you wouldn't mind.
>
> >
> > Note that the overall dia includes TWO thicknesses of insulation per wire
> > c/c or TPI = 1/Overall dia (as above). A spacing factor should not be used
> > because that is only a wild quess. The spacing is used when
> >
> >        TPI x Overall dia = 1   (closewound)
> >        TPI x Overall dia < 1   (spaced windings)
> >        TPI x Overall dia > 1   (TPI incorrect)
> >
> >  If there is any doubt the turns should be actually measured. Your program
> > calcs do not appear to do what you said below.
> >
>
> John, regardless of the insulation error the "method" is unchanged. Let me
> restate since it appears to me that
> my method is unclear to you.
>
> 1) If winding a closewound coil, use zero for the spacing.
> 2) If winding a spacewound coil, use the spacing factor.
> 3) Following actually winding the coil, measure TPI, then adjust the
> spacing factor to match the calculated TPI
> to the actual measured TPI regardess if it's a spacewound coil.
>
> This is exactly what I'm trying to say below. If you thought the insulation
> factor I was using in version 7.04
> was designed in, please understand it was not. Just a simple mistake. Thank
> you for pointing it out. My mouth
> dropped open when I took a look at the code and compared it to my Excel
> version and found I'd left out the
> 2*INS.
>
> Do you have a problem with my method described above?
>
> Bart A.