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

Re: Parallel resonant DRSSTC

Original poster: Sue Gaeta <sgsparky@xxxxxxxxxxx>

The problem is, that I already have too much imaginary current flowing in my tank circuits. I need to stop thinking about so many things, and start doing them.

The P460" circuit is going to be put away for now, because no matter what I do to it, I can't get the spark length to go above a foot. Yesterday, I tried decreasing the # of turns on the primary, and it had no effect. (It's just a pulsed SSTC, not a DRSSTC) I think the Rds on is too high with those devices. I probably need to go above 140 volts input to really get anywhere with them, but my filter caps aren't presently rated for that (yet). I got a plethora of good switching devices now, and found a big heatsink to put them on. Time to move forward....

I was wondering what ever happened to the SSSSSTC! I guess there are a lot of HV parts involved, and a lot of switches that have to have to be timed precisely. Sounds like a pain, but it would have been interesting to see it work.

Tesla list <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Original poster: Steve Ward


The parallel resonant circuit would give the advantage of offering
higher "imaginary" current in the tank circuit, but i cant say if this
is really beneficial. I think the real problem is the impedance match
between the primary (at 350V or so maybe) and the secondary. Normal
SSTCs would use coupling near .5 at times to get the best performance
from them. The higher K lowers the leakage inductance, and i believe
that has the effect of a better impedance match. I sorta showed that
higher primary voltage helped a little, with my HVSSTC thing with the
marx-generator type switching inverters, but that was just way too
much work.

I have a feeling that more current in the primary circuit is not
really what we need for longer sparks, though i could be wrong ;-).


On Thu, 06 Jan 2005 11:27:09 -0700, Tesla list wrote: > Original poster: Sue Gaeta > > Hi all, > > I was curious if anyone has ever tried designing a DRSSTC using a capacitor > in parallel with the primary rather than in series with it. If something > like that could work it would have a big advantage that the extreamly high > primary current would be between the capacitor and primary, and there would > be almost no current throgh the switching devices. > > Has anyone ever thought of something like this, or played with the idea > with simulation software? > > What would be the disadvantage of something like that? > > Sue > >