MassiveProng said:
Wrong. "Interleaved" is NOT synonymous with "stacked", idiot.
You're an idiot.
None are, dumbass. That's because you chose an incorrect term which
is not even used by the industry for this application.
look harder.
OMG! What, no standard idiots from the retarded bandwagon response?
I think you'll find that most people you castigate in such a manner wont
give you a hard time when you say meaningful things.
No. I am talking about a C I core where the primary and secondary
are separated by several inches.
I figured that. I merely gave another example of a mass manufactured
analogous method to improve isolation.
You are one of those dopes that calls zero degrees C cold.
It is all relative. Planck would have a field day with you.
I suspect that you make retarded assessments all the time, as you
have already made several in these few threads alone.
this is pointless, gratuitous, and makes you sound like a spoiled child.
Try taking apart an fried, baked solid transformer from a '43
Chrysler AM tube radio apart forensically to find one mil fish paper
between 40 layers of windings of #40 wire at about 25 turns per layer,
then counting the layers to reconstruct the turns count, then
examining the primary so that you can rebuild the thing for the WWII
aviator that owns the refurbed car.
It was such a pain in the ass to re-make that I had to leave on
lamination plate out during the rebuild.. 100% vacuum impregnated
with Dolph's varnish, and baked at 425F for several hours. Radio has
worked for years since with no appreciable heat from the transformer.
I switched to #38 wire for the secondary. I suspect that made much of
the difference.
OTOH this was interesting.
Only at 60Hz. For switchers, it's all about making the circuit
perform optimally, and in such cases gaps are often needed, and very
often used to condition the drive signals.
in theory, nobody uses gaps in forward-mode transformers any more; they
used to be used to deal with problems like volt-second imbalance and
staircase saturation, but then along came current-mode control, and we
havent looked back since.
base drives used to be a bit tricky (lots of fun when driving
tralingtons with 150A Ib), but with FETs its easy.
in practise, lots of people still havent cottoned onto (P)CMC yet, hell
people still use TL494's. Some earlier threads about 3524-based SMPS for
audio stuff showed that primitive designs still abound, and many
"designers" dont really know what they are doing.
To a point. That would depend on the volts per turn used for the
design. Saturation is possible in many cases where accepted design
rules/conventions were not followed.
the key here is: pick the V/T such that saturation is avoided (and core
losses are acceptable) then stick as much power through the transformer
as you like (at least until the wires melt).
I did debug a 1.5kW 24:400V PCMC smps once that would explode at high
temperature. turned out the primary current sense CT wire got rather
hot, and at a high enough ambient the CT core hit its 140C curie
temperature, at which point the relative permeability dropped to 1 (from
5,000 or so), and the current sense signal disappeared, so the
controller wound up to full grunt, and things went downhill from there
The fix was a 250C Tc core in the CT.
and Bah Humbug to "design rules". They are for cookbook "engineers" who
cant design magnetics; its not like its hard.
my personal favourite is the so-called transformer equation:
E = 4.444NBAF
and even funnier is the "modified" version for square waves,
E = 4NBAF
hilarious. especially since they inevitably appear sans context or
derivation. I loathe magic numbers - after all, if you dont know where
it came from, how do you know its right?
what the hell is wrong (or hard) about Vpk = NAWBpk ?!
Did you think it was a five minute exercise?
fair enough.
Cheers
Terry
