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

Re: Theory of LTR

Original poster: "Bob (R.A.) Jones" <a1accounting@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Hi Richard,

The equivalent circuit is just for the SG and C. I used it with an NST to
determine the C for the biggest bang.

But its equally applicable to any ballast including inductive and
inductive/resistive combination or primary ballast.
It just requires that you can define the ballast impedance (constant
impedance) so you can put that impedance in series with the equivalent
circuit and do the ac analysis on it.
The theory is applicable to a sync gap. But as a static gap has similar
parameters in a LTR, STR sense you can use it for that as well.

Robert (R. A.) Jones
A1 Accounting, Inc., Fl
407 649 6400
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tesla list" <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, November 14, 2005 10:01 AM
Subject: Re: Theory of LTR


> Original poster: "Dmitry (father dest)" <dest@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>
>
>  > Original poster: "Bob (R.A.) Jones" <a1accounting@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
>  > Hi all,
>
>  > I recently tried a different direction on the theoretical the optimum
>  > primary C (Cp) for a given inductive ballast (L)
>
> is it only for nst using case? coz i for example choose the ballast
> for the Cp and the current i need, not vice-versa.
>
> -----
> The solution to no primary hits lay in getting rid of the primary!
> This is no joke either.
> 20-06-96 (c) Richard Hull, TCBOR
>
>
>