Re: An SSTC simulation

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

Original poster: a a <hermantoothrot2000-at-yahoo-dot-com> 

What part is dangerous about the hard switching? Is it the extra loss, or 
the voltage spikes? The voltage spikes can be handled with MOVs, and when 
tuned right, the switching should be reletively soft. The lower coupling 
the better for this too because there is less frequency splitting. When 
tuned to the primary frequency, there is no notch.

Tesla list <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com> wrote:
Original poster: "Dan Strother"

Ah, very interesting. The circuit and concept look great, but there is one
thing bothering me: Won't dynamically tuning to the secondary coil cause
the MOSFETs to dangerously hard-switch a lot of current in the primary circuit?


Dan Strother



 >Original poster: Kchdlh-at-aol-dot-com
 >
 >Fundamentally, yes: series-resonant primary, parallel-resonant secondary.
 >But my scheme a) uses resonant storage-capacitor charging while Jimmy's
 >does not and b) incorporates "dynamic" control of the tuning. Also, I
 >don't believe Jimmy's storage capacitors are necessarily fully discharged
 >every mains cycle. So perhaps they'd last a whole lot longer!
 >
 >In regard to my amplifying circuit, I'd like to point out something I just
 >realized. There's no! need to have the U1 EX-OR in the circuit: regardless
 >of the phasing between primary and secondary, feedback will be positive
 >during one of the two mains half-cycles; doesn't matter which one.
 >
 >Just slap any old secondary onto it and it will take off!
 >
 >Ken
 >



Jimmy