[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

*To*: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com*Subject*: Re: More ISSTC theory stuff*From*: "Tesla list" <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>*Date*: Mon, 07 Jun 2004 18:30:10 -0600*Resent-Date*: Mon, 7 Jun 2004 18:34:14 -0600*Resent-From*: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com*Resent-Message-ID*: <6bI_YC.A.OPG.8lQxAB-at-poodle>*Resent-Sender*: tesla-request-at-pupman-dot-com

Original poster: Ed Phillips <evp-at-pacbell-dot-net> " >Very interesting. I myself have a lot of experience with designing >microstrip versions of 1/4 wave transformers and similar. Sorry, I think this needs some more explanation. Here is my theory... In a ISSTC, the secondary is a 1/4 wave transformer and the primary is an L-match. The fact that they are inductively, rather than directly coupled complicates things, but not much. (The inductive coupling can be modelled as an ideal step-up transformer, as Antonio showed in his diagram, and Richie Burnett explains on his site) Anyhow, a 1/4 wave transformer is equivalent to a L-match, at its resonant frequency. So if we are modelling the ISSTC at resonance (and since it's a feedback system, it will ALWAYS run at resonance) then we can picture it as two L-matches, OR two 1/4 wave transformers, with the inverter at one end (stepped up by that ideal transformer) and the streamer load at the other. If you use PSpice you will end up modelling it as L-matches with lumped components, since PSpice didn't have a transmission line resonator model, last time I looked." I disagree with a lot of this discussion, at least insofar as it calls a top-loaded secondary a "quarter-wave transformer". No way! The typical top-loaded secondary has an almost constant current distribution and therefore must be considered as an inductor, not a transmission line. The only transmission line which has a constant current (or voltage) distribution is one terminated in its characteristic impedance and is thus equivalent to a transformer with a ratio of 1. Ed

- Prev by Date:
**Re: Cap-driven x-former?** - Next by Date:
**Re: Cap-driven x-former?** - Prev by thread:
**RE: More ISSTC theory stuff** - Next by thread:
**Re: More ISSTC theory stuff** - Index(es):