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

Re: Similation results predict racing arcs

Original poster: Greg Leyh <lod@xxxxxxxxxxx>

Hi Gerry,

Some very interesting work in Part2. Was curious about your simulation setup. Why did you settle on nine segments? It seems like a reasonable number, just curious why you chose it. I tried setting up a similiar problem in Simplorer, where I divided the sec into twelve segments. I never managed to get the simulation to produce a believable output waveform however, probably because I was too lazy to develop a coupling coefficient for *every* combination of segments and the primary; for simplicity I ignored any couplings below about 0.05, thinking they contributed little to the total stored energy.

It's interesting that your results seem to correlate well with actual observed racing arcs. I was also wondering if there's any shortcuts to the n(n+1)/2 requirement for the numbers of k's in the problem.

In case you haven't already seen it, you might want to check out the Tesla Secondary Simulation Project at:

An incredible amount of excellent work simulating the complex nature of coupled secondaries has been carried out there.


Original poster: "Gerry  Reynolds" <gerryreynolds@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Hi All,

I created a spice model of a distributed coupled secondary using the coupling coefficients calculated by JavaTC. This model has distributed coupling from the primary as well as the distributed mutual coupling between segments of the secondary. I wrote up the results and had Terry host it. The simulation results (using my coil for the model) seem to predict where on the coil the racing arc will breakout from and agrees with my observations.

Just before the conclusion, I stated why I thought the breakout went to the top of the coil - an explaination that I now think is wrong. I have since come up with a simplier explaination, so if anyone wants it, I can email the updates to you. If a lot of interest, maybe I can get Terry to rehost the document :o))


I also reposted the first part with some corrections:


Please look it over and comment. I think we will be able to predict the worthiness of any new primary design.