Re: curious ballast behavior (fwd)

["Tesla list" <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>]

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2007 21:57:51 -0700
From: Dr.Hankenstein <Dr.Hankenstein@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: Tesla list <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: curious ballast behavior (fwd)

Engineers designing "high power substations" usually don't run into this
problem because they don't parallel large power transformers in the first
case mainly due to the increase in fault current. Furthermore, the higher
fault currents available by paralleling transformers normally necessitates
changing out all the breakers and buss and costing big $$$. Power companies
are looking for reliable, inexpensive ways to provide their customers with
power. I only know of one instance where transformer impedance was
mismatched (three very large single phase units), and this was only for an
"emergency condition". It can be done, but you must not exceed the VA
rating of either transformer. This typically means that you will have to
operate your transformer bank at a much reduced capacity or risk burning
them up. Consequently you may not gain the power transfer you expect.
Experimenters should note that whenever paralleling transformers, whether
they are MOT's, neon sign, plate or filament transformers,etc. it is always
a good idea to use matched sets or at least test the impedance/voltage
ratio of the transformers they have for compatibility to avoid this problem.

> [Original Message]
> From: Tesla list <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
> To: <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: 10/11/2007 5:59:29 AM
> Subject: Re: curious ballast behavior (fwd)
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2007 01:49:26 -0600
> From: resonance <resonance@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: Tesla list <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: curious ballast behavior (fwd)
>
>
>
>
> Circulating currents may damage MOTs especially when a number of
different 
> types or model numbers are primary parallel connected.  This is a common 
> problem especially in the high power substation transformers where
multiple 
> units are connected.  Careful impedance matching is the solution.
>
> Dr. Resonance
>
> Resonance Research Corp.
> www.resonanceresearch.com
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Tesla list" <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
> To: <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2007 7:46 PM
> Subject: curious ballast behavior (fwd)
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2007 18:44:15 -0400
> From: Scott Bogard <teslas-intern@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: tesla@xxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: curious ballast behavior
>
>
> Hey all,
>      A few weeks ago I did an experiment, I removed the Ballast form my
> 4-MOT coil to see if my sparks would get bigger (not a good idea for my
> setup, but a few couple second runs will not hurt anything).  They did
> not, the arcs grew incredibly tiny, a few inches long.  I re-tuned, and
> tuned, and tried every primary configuration available, but It never
> worked.  Thinking I may have fried a MOT with my rash behavior, I put it
> back on and tried again, the coil lit up like a champ.  I just thought
> this was curious and felt like sharing it with the group, especially in
> light of the "Bogus Ballast" thread a while back.  I know some people run
> their MOTs without a ballast, but I guess I cannot without some other
> design changes!
>
> Scott Bogard.
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Climb to the top of the charts! Play Star Shuffle: the word scramble 
> challenge with star power.
> http://club.live.com/star_shuffle.aspx?icid=starshuffle_wlmailtextlink_oct
>
>
>
>
>