OZ5IQ wrote:
>
>
>
>HI Tom, W8JI and the group
>
>TNX for your answer to my comment. Always gd to have tech. discussions. HI
>Just think of how we would have been IF we always have been listening to our
>old
>ones. but to your comment
>
>>> I Always put those current limiting devices at the LOW voltage
>>> potential.
>
>
>RE:
>>
>>That's not a solution I'm afraid.
>
>Well you shold NOT be - and of the following reasons:
>
>>When you have an arc, the resistor MUST be able to handle the full
>>supply voltage across the terminals of the resistor no matter where
>>it is located in the path.
>
>Thats not correct - why you forget the selfinduction in the trafo ! How do
>you
>think it behaves for lets say even 1mS arc ? Yes, the rise in voltage will
>NEVER travel through the trafo, why the "pulse" is at that short time !!
>You
>may transfer pulses at longer period yes, but not that short - they will "die"
>relatively short time after entering the trafo.
>
>>That is why you always need a suitable HV resistor, even if you
>>place it in the negative rail....which is a terrible place to put it
>>anyway because it is bypassed by all the stray C in the power
>>supply and requires the negative rail to lift to supply potential in
>>order to limit current!
>AGN.
>remember the transfer speed capability of a trafo.
>its another thing when talking ferrite trafoes - you may be right.
>
>So - yes theres an easy way out !
>
The initial current pulse comes out of the smoothing capacitor, so the
transformer inductance does nothing to help.
This same discussion happened here some months ago, and I put together a
little web page with schematics. It's still there, at:
www.ifwtech.com/g3sek/misc/glitchres.htm
73 from Ian G3SEK Editor, 'The VHF/UHF DX Book'
'In Practice' columnist for RadCom (RSGB)
http://www.ifwtech.com/g3sek
--
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/amps
Submissions: amps@contesting.com
Administrative requests: amps-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems: owner-amps@contesting.com
|