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

Re: is this the correct piggy?

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

Hi Ben,
Yeh, I had a brain fart that nite. The number of caps used are the same (strings have half as many caps and you now use twice as many strings). Assuming the secondary design doesn't change, the peak current will be twice as much but you have twice as many strings to accommodate that. Spark gap and other resistive losses due to wiring outside of the MMC will be 4X (I^2R) so this part may need to be beefier. 

Gerry R.


Original poster: ben eells <squeels2171@xxxxxxxxx>
That was kinda hard to follow. So are you saying I was right in my assumption that i can get the same performace using a SRSG out of this 7kv 15kva pig as a 14kv 15kva pig? And just to make sure, I could do this with the same amount of caps only in a different series parallel configuration? 

Tesla list <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Original poster: "Gerry Reynolds"

Hi Steve,

You are very correct. When I cut the string in two, I forgot that
the "half string" is now twice the capacitance. So when you add the
other half string in parallel, you get the 4X capacitance using the
same number of caps.

I must have been having one of them days. Just forget every thing
I said on that post :-))

Gerry R.

>Original poster: "Steve Ward"
>
>Hi Gerry,
>
>
>>Yes and No. If I assume the real power draw is 15KW (resonable
>>assumtion for a 120 BPS SRSG), then the bang energy needs to be the
>>same as with a 14.4KV PIG, 15KVA, using a SRSG at 120 pps. As the
>>voltage drops the V^2 portion of 1/2 CV^2 drops by one fourth so the
>>C needs to be four times larger at half the voltage(everything else
>>the same). Read this as twice the cost of your tank cap.
>
>Are you saying the cost per Joule changes with the voltage?
>
>Maybe you need to read your own post twice, Gerry ;-)
>
>The cap bank will cost the same $$ per joule, i dont care what your
>transformer is.
>
>Steve Ward
>
> If you use
>>a ARSG at say 400 pps and keep this presentation rate the same
>>between the two examples, the same thing can be said. If you dont
>>increase the cap, then the average BPS would need to increase to
>>balance the energy flow rate and this means a higher Irms thru the
>>caps and is potentially another cost increase in the capacitance..
>
>
>
>
<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=49981/*http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/mailbeta/features_spam.html>Sucker-punch spam with award-winning protection. Try the <http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=49981/*http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/mailbeta/features_spam.html>free Yahoo! Mail Beta.