Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +from:W4EF@dellroy.com: 324 ]

Total 324 documents matching your query.

321. Re: [Amps] Acceptable SWR for Tube Amps (score: 1)
Author: Michael Tope <W4EF@dellroy.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2025 10:35:53 -0800
Thank you for this info, Peter. I was presuming that Lukasz question pertained to the case of remote operation where a fixed preset was used without adjustment at different levels of VSWR (like you m
/archives//html/Amps/2025-02/msg00007.html (12,360 bytes)

322. Re: [Amps] Paralleling plate xfmrs. (score: 1)
Author: Michael Tope <W4EF@dellroy.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2025 06:47:47 -0700
I was curious about this so I did a real quick simulation in LTspice. When you parallel transformer secondaries with a small imbalance in secondary voltage, there is an inverse relationship between c
/archives//html/Amps/2025-10/msg00021.html (18,740 bytes)

323. Re: [Amps] Paralleling plate xfmrs. (score: 1)
Author: Michael Tope <W4EF@dellroy.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2025 17:53:01 -0700
Hi Jim, Hmm, ignoring the impact of primary resistance, a 19.09 ohms secondary resistance could (in theory) lead to a current imbalance of 0.96 amps with an 18.4 volt difference in secondary voltage.
/archives//html/Amps/2025-10/msg00026.html (10,581 bytes)

324. Re: [Amps] Paralleling plate xfmrs. (score: 1)
Author: Michael Tope <W4EF@dellroy.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2025 19:45:52 -0700
Yeah, based on the numerous examples you cite, Jim, and the LTspice simulations, I am convinced that paralleling can work, but that there will always be at least some current imbalance. Whether or no
/archives//html/Amps/2025-10/msg00028.html (9,999 bytes)

Current List: 321 - 324
Page: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17]
This search system is powered by Namazu