[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- To: tesla@xxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: PFC
- From: "Tesla list" <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 08:21:09 -0600
- Delivered-to: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Delivered-to: email@example.com
- Old-return-path: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Resent-date: Tue, 5 Apr 2005 08:22:39 -0600 (MDT)
- Resent-from: tesla@xxxxxxxxxx
- Resent-message-id: <bIBaq.A.WzF.u8pUCB@poodle>
- Resent-sender: tesla-request@xxxxxxxxxx
Original poster: "Gerald Reynolds" <gerryreynolds@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
I've wrestled with this myself. One would think that a LTR capcitive load
on the secondary would give the primary impedance a capacitive look. I'm
told that the shunts in the core keep the NST's primary looking inductive.
I still dont think I understand this issue. I wonder if the sparkgap is
part of the effect since it takes "real power" from the charging system.
Original poster: Ed Phillips <evp@xxxxxxxxxxx>
I still can't understand some of the rules of thumb for "power factor
correction" of TC power transformers, considering that the load is
already capacitive and disruptive in nature.