[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: More Coupling...
Original poster: "by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-uswest-dot-net>" <paul-at-abelian.demon.co.uk>
Barton B. Anderson <tesla123-at-pacbell-dot-net> wrote:
> ... a second look at your graph and the coupling direction was
> clear.
OK, I just made a similar mistake too - I asked for your winding
inductances when in fact you already mentioned them in an earlier
post. Doh!
Comparing acmi output numbers with your measurements, we have
| acmi Bart
| predicts measures
|
| Primary 108.6 uH 107.13 uH
| Secondary 80.3 mH 87.6 mH
|
| Mutual 439.8 uH 627.0 uH
I'm pleased with the primary agreement because that's the one acmi
will struggle with, if anything.
Your reported secondary inductance is way too high. I took the
dimensions of your secondary from your web page
http://www.classictesla-dot-com/photos/gizmos/bart.html
as 12.75" diam, 45.0" length, and 1000 turns. The Nagaoka inductance
for this winding comes out at 80.532 mH, which agrees very well with
acmi. (As usual, acmi does a good job with the secondary because a lot
of small turns are well approximated by current filaments).
Could it be that you have a few more than 1000t as indeed your web
page hints? If I adjust the turns to match your quoted secondary
inductance I find 1043 turns are required. With this change, I get
| acmi Bart
| predicts measures
|
| Primary 108.6 uH 107.13 uH
| Secondary 87.4 mH 87.6 mH
|
| Mutual 458.6 uH 627.0 uH
which puts the self inductance right, but the mutual is still out
by some 30%. That counts as a large discrepancy and more than I would
have expected.
A couple of questions: You measured 2.59V across the secondary when
the primary was carrying 10.95A at 60Hz. Did you measure the
secondary V when the primary current was turned off, as the secondary
will pick up a certain amount of induced voltage just from the back-
ground field of surrounding mains wiring? Was the hair dryer anywhere
near the secondary - near enough for its AC magnetic field to couple
directly to the secondary? I take it your 2.59V was RMS and not peak?
Ed Phillips <evp-at-pacbell-dot-net> wrote:
> Will have to try a similar measurement here
> using a small flat primary I happen to have.
Any coupling measurements you can make would be very welcome - for
any shape of primary.
Regards,
--
Paul Nicholson,
Manchester, UK.
--