Re: Triple Resonance SSTC

["Tesla list" <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Original poster: "Antonio Carlos M. de Queiroz" <acmdq@xxxxxxxxxx>

Tesla list wrote:
> Original poster: "Jimmy Hynes" <jphynes@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> I thought about doing a triple resonance deal shortly after I came up
> with the DRSSTC idea. I was still thinking of running it in "notch"
> mode, and was hoping for benifits of even less energy stored in the
> primary capacitor for the same bang energy. I didn't find any way to
> let it notch very well, and eventually concluded there was no real
> reason to add another LC (the R adds itself, unfortunately). The
> disadvantage is that you have to make another LC (duh), and it's also
> one more resonance to tune, which can be annoying.
It is possible to tune a triple resonance network to work in the "notch mode"
(producing waveforms similar to what happens in a magnifier tuned for
complete energy transfer), but the voltage gain, defined as the ratio between
the the maximum output voltage over the peak input voltage, for given
primary and load capacitances, results smaller than in a drsstc with the same
capacitances, and there is no way to obtain "resistive" input, where 
the current
and voltage are in phase at the input, as is natural in a drsstc.
It is possible to operate at one of the resonances, but I don't see advantage
on this. The use of feedback in this system is more problematic too, as the
three resonances may cause some zero crossings of the primary current to
be missed.
So far, I didn't find a good way to design these systems. It is 
possible, however,
to just split the secondary coil of a drsstc and adjust the coupling 
coefficient of
the transformer to compensate, ignoring the effect of the capacitance 
at the junction
between the secondary and tertiary coils, and obtain something that 
behaves almost
as a drsstc.

Antonio Carlos M. de Queiroz