[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: 3rd harmonic trap
- To: tesla@xxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: 3rd harmonic trap
- From: "Tesla list" <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 12:46:59 -0700
- Delivered-to: email@example.com
- Delivered-to: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Old-return-path: <email@example.com>
- Resent-date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 12:47:53 -0700 (MST)
- Resent-from: tesla@xxxxxxxxxx
- Resent-message-id: <K_31BD.A.HTB.nZHQCB@poodle>
- Resent-sender: tesla-request@xxxxxxxxxx
Original poster: Ed Phillips <evp@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Tesla list wrote:
> Original poster: Ed Phillips <evp@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> "Dear List
> I am wondering whether it would be possible to use a parallel-resonant
> circuit in series with the primary of an SSTC as a "trap" to suppress
> unwanted 3rd harmonic mode of oscillation.
> Does anyone know if this is feasible or even desireable?
> You could certainly do that, but don't think the difference would be
> noticeable. There isn't that much harmonic energy present to begin with
> and the inductive coupling to the tuned secondary wouldn't pass much of
> whatever is there.
OOPS! Didn't read that as carefully as I should and withdraw the
remark as I can't say whether such a trap would reduce or enhance the
possibility of the setup oscillating at a harmonic. Somewhere I have a
paper written by a guy who was involved in a cyclotron at UCLA and which
discusses all of the problems of trying to drive a resonant load from a
self-excited oscillator. His conclusion was that it's very hard to get
stable AND efficient operation.