Re: [TCML] PFC Question (again)

[FutureT@xxxxxxx]

In a message dated 5/26/2008 4:28:34 P.M. US Eastern Standard Time,  
bartb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx writes:

>It's possible that a few like Kevin "might" be running LTR, but  
>I think for the majority of pig or PT users (the garage coiler), the  cap 
>size is either resonant or STR from a standpoint of cost and  energy.


Bart,
 
For pig coils, STR is probably more common.  This may be true  for
PT coils too.  However many PT's are rated at 1.5kVA.  The  resonant
or slightly LTR value cap is not that large for such a coil.  The  1.5kVA
rating of a PT is very similar to many NST powered coils.  Such  coils
do well with a 120 bps sync rotary.  The cap value for a 1.5kVA  PT
is similar to the cap value used by many NST coilers.   Although
many PT coilers *may* run STR, they could run slightly LTR if they
wanted to.  In fact the cap could even be a little smaller for the  PT,
because it's not so important to keep the voltage low when using 
a PT, as it is when using an NST (due to PT robustness).  
 
Cheers,
John


>My comment is aimed toward the "majority" of pig and pt  users. It is an 
>assumption on my part, but it's not hard to look at  economy or even 
>energy at the gap to dictate the need. I don't have  recent data to 
>support it, but past data does. In this area, I doubt  much has changed. 
>The economy really sucks the last few years and I  doubt much change has 
>taken place to allow large capacitances or the  cost of the gaps needed 
>(or the AC supply current to allow this).  Probably a few out there, but 
>I really doubt it is the  norm.

>Take care,
>Bart








**************Get trade secrets for amazing burgers. Watch "Cooking with 
Tyler Florence" on AOL Food.      
(http://food.aol.com/tyler-florence?video=4&?NCID=aolfod00030000000002)
_______________________________________________
Tesla mailing list
Tesla@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.pupman.com/mailman/listinfo/tesla