[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Auto Quenching - OOPs!! forget that one ;-)



Original poster: "Antonio Carlos M. de Queiroz by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>" <acmq-at-compuland-dot-com.br>

Tesla list wrote:
> 
> Original poster: "Terry Fritz" <twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>
> 
> Hi All,
> 
> Disregard yesterday's post and my ideas about "auto quenching".  As it
> turns out, the effect does not exist.  It was just a computer modeling
> error on my part.  The way I had it set up allowed the firing voltage to
> vary as I changed the coupling.  As I worked with my coil last night it
> seemed that something was really wrong with the idea.  I churned through
> the models today and found the problem.  The proper peak voltage vs.
> coupling graph, even with all the losses, looks like this:
> 
> http://hot-streamer-dot-com/temp/OLTC08-29-01.gif
> 
> Probably exactly what Marco and Antonio would agree with ;-))

Now it's ok. Even with high losses, the theory says that high coupling
invariably leads to smaller losses, higher output voltage, and the 
system behaving closer to the lossless case. With high coupling the 
special values of the coupling coefficient are important, as can be
seen by the ripples in your plot, corresponding to 0.18 (mode 5,6),
0.22 (4,5), and 0.28 (3,4). The next ones would be 0.38 (2,3) and
finally 0.6 (1,2), counting only the main line (there are infinitely
many other modes between these, with complete transfer at the second
or other notches). The behavior that Marco mentions, where a slight 
detuning of the system leads to greater voltage gain (but incomplete
energy transfer) appears more clearly at the last high coupling 
levels, but always exists in some degree. Of course, 
with losses the optimum values of k are different, but not by great 
amounts until the system is totally degenerated. With high coupling, 
the effects of losses are less significant, since the energy transfer 
completes before the losses have time to distort significantly the 
waveforms, and the lossless theory applies well enough for design 
purposes even in extreme cases. Simulators use the theory, and they 
must show this too.
As you could see, simulators can lie, but not Nature.

Antonio Carlos M. de Queiroz