Convert half-wave rectified to AC?

[Phil Allison]

"Winston is a Autistic Pig "

** You have no idea what you are talking about !!!

Um, Phil? I was agreeing with you; most transformers have no
deliberate air gaps in the magnetic circuit. Some do. Not all.

** None do.

http://info.ee.surrey.ac.uk/Workshop/advice/coils/leak/weld/index.html
Note the magnetic circuit coupling the primary of this welding
transformer to it's secondary.

** Got SFA with having an air gap that affects the primary.

** Not true of either.

http://www.coilcraft.com/pdfs/doc627_Power_transformer_design.pdf
Under Step 7: "However for flyback transformers and chokes, an air
gap is necessary."

** Flyback transformers are not true transformers - they are a special
kind of inductor.

The name is a misnomer.

You fucking idiot.


** Read what I wrote - you fucking tenth wit.

Cos you are still ignoring it.

** That says he has the 120 volt AC supply available.

Nup.

** Yes it does - you fucking twentieth wit.

He may indeed have the AC supply available but the
engineering constraint is that he cannot provide it.

** He can if he tries.

** OK - you go get a mains transformer and TRY it.

Your simulation is BOLLOCKS !!

You feel that raising the average D.C. current above zero
in the primary is likely to cause sufficient magnetic
saturation at the positive current peaks to cause the
transformer to overheat to the point of ignition?

Did I get that right?


** Finally.

Now, piss off.

You *are* beautiful when you are angry.

** Get cancer and die you fucking nut case.

 

[Winston]

Phil Allison wrote:

"Winston is a Autistic Pig"

Thanks Phil, you made my morning!

Just now I checked out the URL
www.staco.com. You Could Be Right!

** You have no idea what you are talking about !!!

Um, Phil? I was agreeing with you; most transformers have no
deliberate air gaps in the magnetic circuit. Some do. Not all.

** None do.

http://info.ee.surrey.ac.uk/Workshop/advice/coils/leak/weld/index.html
Note the magnetic circuit coupling the primary of this welding
transformer to it's secondary.

** Got SFA with having an air gap that affects the primary.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SFA

Perhaps. Which SFA would that be?
I admit that Saturated Fatty Acid was not part of my
conjecture.

** Not true of either.

http://www.coilcraft.com/pdfs/doc627_Power_transformer_design.pdf
Under Step 7: "However for flyback transformers and chokes, an air
gap is necessary."


** Flyback transformers are not true transformers - they are a special
kind of inductor.

The name is a misnomer.

You fucking idiot.

Are autotransformers a type of transformer or are they misnamed
as well? Would you eMail Paul and tell him that his company is
in error please?

Paul Johnson
Sales Engineer
937-253-1191 x143
johnsonp@StacoEnergy.com

The IEEE specifically includes autotransformers in the 'transformer'
category:
http://standards.ieee.org/findstds/standard/295-1969.html
They are mistaken too, yes?

What about Tesla Coils? Do they 'transform' or
just 'induct'?

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/imagenes_tesla/tesla17_02.gif

Where is the dividing line, Phil?
Does the inclusion of an air gap between windings disqualify
a device as a 'transformer'?

Which varieties of 'capacitors' are not really capacitors?
Are their 'transistors' that cannot really be thought of
as transistors? Which I.C.s really aren't?

** Read what I wrote - you fucking tenth wit.

Cos you are still ignoring it.

There's a lot of that going around.

** That says he has the 120 volt AC supply available.

Nup.

** Yes it does - you fucking twentieth wit.


He may indeed have the AC supply available but the
engineering constraint is that he cannot provide it.


** He can if he tries.

Perhaps. We don't know that, though.
Until the OP says A.C. *is* available,
the problem is defined. Not perfectly, I admit.

(...)

** Get cancer and die you fucking nut case.

Can I have the rights to that for a tee shirt?


--Winston <-- We've got lyrics, now for the melody!

 

[Phil Allison]

"Winston is a Vile Autistic Pig"

Thanks Phil, you made my morning!

** Hope it is your very last - you lying asshole.

** Flyback transformers are not true transformers - they are a special
kind of inductor.

The name is a misnomer.

You fucking idiot.

Are autotransformers a type of transformer ..

** Yes.

But totally irrelevant.



** Read what I wrote - you fucking tenth wit.

Then go drop fucking dead, you pile of sub human dung.

You mother should be in jail for having bred an autistic pig like you.

And the donkey brained criminal that fucked her put to death.

Get off this NG and stay off.

YOU are now my number 1 target.



.... Phil

 

[Winston]

Phil Allison wrote:

"Winston is a Vile Autistic Pig"


Thanks Phil, you made my morning!


** Hope it is your very last - you lying asshole.

I lied? Where? When?

If I've got the science wrong about the resonant
transformer converter, it's not because I'm
intentionally trying to deceive anyone.

You feel that it would not work as the simulation
shows and would likely overheat and possibly burn
because of excessive magnetic saturation in the core.

That is valuable input; exactly the sort of info
I was seeking in this newsgroup. Thanks!

** Flyback transformers are not true transformers - they are a special
kind of inductor.

The name is a misnomer.

You fucking idiot.

Are autotransformers a type of transformer ..


** Yes.

But totally irrelevant.

OK, just checking. I'm trying to understand how
an autotransformer like an ignition coil for example
is a type of transformer until it is used in a car
in flyback mode. At that point it is no longer a
kind of transformer? It is a puzzlement because I
don't understand how that could be. Is it the lack
of an intentional air gap the point of differentiation?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignition_coil

"This specific form of the autotransformer, together
with the contact breaker and a capacitor (...),
converts low voltage from a battery into the high
voltage required by spark plugs in an internal
combustion engine."

Then go drop fucking dead, you pile of sub human dung.

You mother should be in jail for having bred an autistic pig like you.

And the donkey brained criminal that fucked her put to death.

Get off this NG and stay off.

YOU are now my number 1 target.

Phil?

You might want to crank back on the language a little.

Your ISP isn't gonna appreciate the threatening nature
of that sentiment. They have enough to do.

--Winston

 

[Tom Jones]

On 8/2/2011 8:46 AM, Phil Allison wrote:

"Winston is a Vile Autistic Pig"
And Phil Allison is a vulgar twit.
Your mother should be in jail for having bred an autistic pig like you.
Phil, do you even know who your mother is?
You are now my number 1 target.
Phil, do I rate at least #2?

Twit!

 

[John Fields]

On Mon, 01 Aug 2011 08:07:28 -0700, John Larkin
<jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Mon, 01 Aug 2011 02:16:21 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Sun, 31 Jul 2011 18:51:21 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:


You recently criticized me - entirely incorrectly - for degrading
women and then using that degradation as an insult.

---
Well, from your past performances, one would hardly expect you to
accept criticism objectively so, without the proof to refute my past
criticism, your statement that my criticism was incorrect is entirely
hollow.

What a massive heap of lame words,

---
You didn't understand it then, huh?
---

all to avoid discussing electronics.

---
Most of the time, when I post a circuit I want to discuss, (which is
hardly ever, since my bent is to supply solutions for querants'
problems) unless it's dead simple, I'll accompany the schematic with a
circuit description, just as a courtesy, in order to allow anyone
who's interested in the circuit to follow my thinking.

Your failing to do that indicates to me that you don't really want to
discuss the circuit, and all you want to do is grandstand.

Moreover, since the subject of this thread is about converting
half-wave rectified AC (pulsating DC) into AC, and the original body
further defined the reconstituted AC as suitable for driving a motor,
your sub-harmonic generator post is really off-topic.

Just more evidence of grandstanding, as evidenced by the fact that
you've never let being off-topic stand in the way of patting yourself
on the back.

--
JF

 

[P E Schoen]

An even simpler circuit might be good enough for a motor. We may have lost
the OP, but I don't believe he really means to require the half wave diode.
It was probably just an example of an easy way to get 1/2 the voltage from a
common AC source, just as a simple diode lamp dimmer. The following circuit
merely adds a resistor load for the pulsing DC and a capacitor to remove
(most of) the DC component to the motor (which I simulate with an inductor).

Paul

=================================================
Version 4
SHEET 1 880 680
WIRE 160 96 64 96
WIRE 256 96 224 96
WIRE 288 96 256 96
WIRE 400 96 352 96
WIRE 64 144 64 96
WIRE 256 144 256 96
WIRE 400 144 400 96
WIRE 64 272 64 224
WIRE 256 272 256 224
WIRE 256 272 64 272
WIRE 400 272 400 224
WIRE 400 272 256 272
FLAG 64 272 0
SYMBOL voltage 64 128 R0
WINDOW 123 0 0 Left 0
WINDOW 39 0 0 Left 0
SYMATTR InstName V1
SYMATTR Value SINE(0 172 60 0 0 0 60)
SYMBOL diode 160 112 R270
WINDOW 0 32 32 VTop 0
WINDOW 3 0 32 VBottom 0
SYMATTR InstName D1
SYMATTR Value MUR460
SYMBOL res 240 128 R0
SYMATTR InstName R1
SYMATTR Value 100
SYMBOL cap 352 80 R90
WINDOW 0 0 32 VBottom 0
WINDOW 3 32 32 VTop 0
SYMATTR InstName C1
SYMATTR Value 5000ľ
SYMBOL ind 384 128 R0
SYMATTR InstName L1
SYMATTR Value 100m
TEXT 30 296 Left 0 !.tran 1 startup

 

[Phil Allison]

"P E Schoen"

An even simpler circuit might be good enough for a motor. We may have lost
the OP, but I don't believe he really means to require the half wave diode.
It was probably just an example of an easy way to get 1/2 the voltage from a
common AC source, just as a simple diode lamp dimmer.


** The OP could even use a common, triac based, wall plate dimmer set to
about 1/3 duty cycle.

This will give 60 volts rms.


..... Phil

 

[Winston]

P E Schoen wrote:

An even simpler circuit might be good enough for a motor. We may have
lost the OP, but I don't believe he really means to require the half
wave diode. It was probably just an example of an easy way to get 1/2
the voltage from a common AC source, just as a simple diode lamp dimmer.

I agree but without clarification from the OP, we're stuck with the
constraints and requirements in his post.

The following circuit merely adds a resistor load for the pulsing DC and
a capacitor to remove (most of) the DC component to the motor (which I
simulate with an inductor).

Paul

That probably would work, though we'd be depending on back EMF
to clean up the waveforms.
It appears to be about 20% efficient and there'll probably
be vibration and power factor penalties to be paid due to the
very non-sinusoidal power into the motor.

The resonant transformer appears to provide somewhat better
efficiency and very sinewavey voltage and current.

Thanks, Paul.

--Winston

 

[Phil Allison]

"Winston = Wanker "

I agree but without clarification from the OP, we're stuck with the
constraints and requirements in his post.

** You are stuck with them.

The rest of us are not that fucking stupid.




..... Phil

 

[John Larkin]

On Tue, 02 Aug 2011 18:49:23 -0500, John Fields
<jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Mon, 01 Aug 2011 08:07:28 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Mon, 01 Aug 2011 02:16:21 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Sun, 31 Jul 2011 18:51:21 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:


You recently criticized me - entirely incorrectly - for degrading
women and then using that degradation as an insult.

---
Well, from your past performances, one would hardly expect you to
accept criticism objectively so, without the proof to refute my past
criticism, your statement that my criticism was incorrect is entirely
hollow.

What a massive heap of lame words,

---
You didn't understand it then, huh?
---

all to avoid discussing electronics.

---
Most of the time, when I post a circuit I want to discuss, (which is
hardly ever, since my bent is to supply solutions for querants'
problems) unless it's dead simple, I'll accompany the schematic with a
circuit description, just as a courtesy, in order to allow anyone
who's interested in the circuit to follow my thinking.

Your failing to do that indicates to me that you don't really want to
discuss the circuit, and all you want to do is grandstand.

Moreover, since the subject of this thread is about converting
half-wave rectified AC (pulsating DC) into AC, and the original body
further defined the reconstituted AC as suitable for driving a motor,
your sub-harmonic generator post is really off-topic.

Just more evidence of grandstanding, as evidenced by the fact that
you've never let being off-topic stand in the way of patting yourself
on the back.

More blather.

John

 

[Roberto Waltman]

John Larkin wrote:

The second rule is that they post the question and never return,
leaving the regulars to debate the issues for some weeks.

From past posts in other forums I believe Mr. "eromlignod" does not
have that modus operandi.
He may have been left behind on the far side of the Google divide...
--
Roberto Waltman

[ Please reply to the group.
Return address is invalid ]

 

[Winston]

Roberto Waltman wrote:

John Larkin wrote:
The second rule is that they post the question and never return,
leaving the regulars to debate the issues for some weeks.

From past posts in other forums I believe Mr. "eromlignod" does not
have that modus operandi.
He may have been left behind on the far side of the Google divide...

Ah. That's too bad.

Based on his posts here, he appears to be a fine fellow,
even if he does spell 'dongilmore' strangely.



--Winston

 

[Rich Grise]

Winston wrote:

Roberto Waltman wrote:
John Larkin wrote:
The second rule is that they post the question and never return,
leaving the regulars to debate the issues for some weeks.

From past posts in other forums I believe Mr. "eromlignod" does not
have that modus operandi.
He may have been left behind on the far side of the Google divide...

Ah. That's too bad.

Based on his posts here, he appears to be a fine fellow,
even if he does spell 'dongilmore' strangely.



But "Eromlignod" sounds so much more fun - it brings to mind castles

and dragons and warrior princes an' shit. ;-)

Cheers!
Rich

 

[Winston]

Rich Grise wrote:

Winston wrote:

Roberto Waltman wrote:
John Larkin wrote:
The second rule is that they post the question and never return,
leaving the regulars to debate the issues for some weeks.

From past posts in other forums I believe Mr. "eromlignod" does not
have that modus operandi.
He may have been left behind on the far side of the Google divide...

Ah. That's too bad.

Based on his posts here, he appears to be a fine fellow,
even if he does spell 'dongilmore' strangely.



But "Eromlignod" sounds so much more fun - it brings to mind castles
and dragons and warrior princes an' shit. ;-)

I dub thee esirg of the hcir.

--notsniw <-- Ain't *that* the truth.