[Amps] Paralleling plate xfmrs.

[Michael Tope]

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 not that 
imbalance is significant depends on the specific parameters of the 
transformers involved (e.g. secondary voltage matching, winding 
resistance, etc) and how much imbalance can be tolerated.

Good discussion thread.

73, Mike W4EF...........

On 10/28/2025 11:36 AM, jim.thom jim.thom at telus.net wrote:
> Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2025 17:53:01 -0700
> From: Michael Tope <W4EF at dellroy.com>
> To: amps at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [Amps] Paralleling plate xfmrs.
>
> Hi Jim,
>
>
>
>> Do you know the primary winding resistance of the subject transformers?
>> 73, Mike W4EF................
> No clue.  I don't think Scott has a lab supply with enough current to do
> the job.
> Right now, the primary's are wired in parallel, using the 250 vac taps for
> initial testing.
>
> On a similar note,  I got email from folks who used to work for companies
> that wound xfmrs.  They all  pointed out that  TURNS  counters are used to
> count both primary...and sec turns....so each transformer ends up
> identical.
>
> One other thing, 7.5 vac @  50 amp fil xfmrs  (for a 3x3 tube)   have been
> paralleled to make a 7.5 vac @ 100 amp fil  xfmr.....used for a 3x10 tube.
> Zero issues there.   Henry Radio did just that on their 3x10 amps.   It's
> common practise on hb  3x10 amps.  The bigger  3x15/20 tubes require a 6.3
> vac  @ 160 amp fil xfmr.
>
> Jim   VE7RF
> _______________________________________________
> Amps mailing list
> Amps at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps