Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[AMPS\]\s+Confused\s+about\s+\'circulating\s+currents\'\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[AMPS\]\s+Confused\s+about\s+\'circulating\s+currents\'\s*$/: 7 ]

Total 7 documents matching your query.

1. [AMPS] Confused about 'circulating currents' (score: 1): Author: wb4mnf@atl.org (Bob Duckworth); Date: Tue, 9 Nov 1999 13:11:53 -0000; What are these mysterious circulating currents? I'm having trouble finding a satisfactory explanation. Also curious as to how to calculate (physics, not rule of thumb) -bob -- FAQ on WWW: http://www.; /archives//html/Amps/1999-11/msg00236.html (7,549 bytes)
2. [AMPS] Confused about 'circulating currents' (score: 1): Author: measures@vcnet.com (measures); Date: Tue, 9 Nov 1999 11:07:10 -0700; ? There is no exact means of tank calculating circulating current because the voltage at the Tune-C and Load-C is somewhat dependant on operator adjustment. A fair approximation is tank Q multiplied; /archives//html/Amps/1999-11/msg00238.html (7,897 bytes)
3. [AMPS] Confused about 'circulating currents' (score: 1): Author: philk5pc@tyler.net (Phil Clements); Date: Tue, 9 Nov 1999 13:19:52 -0600; ? There is no exact means of tank calculating circulating current because the voltage at the Tune-C and Load-C is somewhat dependant on operator adjustment. A fair approximation is tank Q multiplied; /archives//html/Amps/1999-11/msg00241.html (8,046 bytes)
4. [AMPS] Confused about 'circulating currents' (score: 1): Author: jono@enteract.com (Jon Ogden); Date: Tue, 09 Nov 1999 16:15:37 -0600; Well, Bob, no one has offered an explanation for this yet, so I'll take a shot at it! Basically, it stems from the fact that capacitors and inductors story energy. Capacitors store electrical field e; /archives//html/Amps/1999-11/msg00246.html (10,771 bytes)
5. [AMPS] Confused about 'circulating currents' (score: 1): Author: mike@g0mjw.freeserve.co.uk (G0MJW); Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 08:17:51 -0000; so good! I have always tried to use the biggest gauge that would fit and hoped it adequate. Skin effect makes it hard to work out the exact dissipation, and the Q is governed my many other things, b; /archives//html/Amps/1999-11/msg00251.html (8,180 bytes)
6. [AMPS] Confused about 'circulating currents' (score: 1): Author: measures@vcnet.com (measures); Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 04:26:24 -0700; For a 2m amplifier using a pair of 4CX250Bs, 3/16 inch copper tubing would be much too small and lossey due to skin effect. I would use 2-inch Cu ribbon for such a tank. - Rich..., 805.386.3734, www; /archives//html/Amps/1999-11/msg00254.html (8,361 bytes)
7. [AMPS] Confused about 'circulating currents' (score: 1): Author: wb4mnf@atl.org (Bob Duckworth); Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 09:49:12 -0000; Thanks guys, I get it now. I'm not messing with a pi-net. The project is a Hartley osc built from a pair of 100TH. To make something like this work with any kind of efficiency and still give a 'clean; /archives//html/Amps/1999-11/msg00257.html (8,040 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 7
Page: [1]