Driver to drive?

On 11 mayo, 20:35, Tim Williams <tmoran...@gmail.com> wrote:
On May 11, 1:10 am, James Arthur <bogusabd...@verizon.net> wrote:

They offer a range of E-cores, toroids, in a variety of materials.

I assumed you'd want a mess of ferrite E-cores in mat'l #77--you'll
have to stack 'em to get to 10kVA.

https://www.amidoncorp.com/items/65

#77 is starting to look like the material of choice.  Or something
similar, like 75 or 78.

The largest E-core Amidon offers is rated for "about 200W", which
suggests I'd need roughly 50 of them for the 10kW level I'm interested
in.

On an indirectly linked page, I discovered the data:https://www.amidoncorp.com/specs/2-40.pdf

This says the largest core has a winding window of 2 * 0.593 x 0.375
inch (using an E-E arrangement).  A stack of 50 would be 50 * 0.605 > 30" thick, which is certainly possible, but would stick out one side
of my chassis.  On the plus side, I would certainly be able to push
all the voltage through one turn.  A single piece of 3/8" tubing would
fit without too much trouble, though leakage inductance to the primary
wouldn't be great (though it doesn't need to be).  Evidently, A_L
would be 5.3 * 50 = 265uH/T^2, which would be fairly "ideal".  But it
seems like an awful lot of overkill, not to mention way too expensive
($312 for 50 E-cores?  no thanks).

Where does cross sectional area fit into this, anyway?  Isn't that
absorbed into A_L?  So, as long as I am given A_L, I can calculate
inductance and saturation at will?  And saturation only involves path
length, right? -- by amperes per meter, they mean *A/m*, not A.m/m^2
(like how resistivity is actually ohm.m^2/m)?

Ok, so, this is Usenet, right?  If I've made an error, surely there
would have been fifty people in the first hour telling me what an
idiot I am -- since this has not happened, I can only assume my
calculations are correct???  Then why do I calculate that a moderately
sized toroid (like the FT-290-W) will suffice, whereas others have
suggested that I need something approximately as thick as my ankle?

Tim
Hello Tim,

Regarding the Usenet. Be happy that there are also polite people that
don't start to roar immediately. In addition it can also be that
others are not competent enough to tell you whether you are right or
not, or don't have the time to do the complete math. Magnetics is
mysterious in the eyes of many people.

I belong to the people that think that for a 1Turn secondary you need
a large cross section to avoid core saturation. Designing transformers
is balancing between core losses, copper losses, availability of
materials, money, etc.

Best regards,

Wim
PA3DJS
www.tetech.nl
please remove first three letters of alphabet in case of PM.
 
In article <pan.2009.05.11.22.00.23.205719@example.net>,
Rich Grise <richgrise@example.net> wrote:

On Sat, 02 May 2009 17:15:50 -0700, Mark-T wrote:

DId anyone here see the problem presented in
the Science section of NY Times last week?
Quite startling, to see something so sophisticated
in a 'general readership' publication.

Is it solvable without a calculus of variations approach?

I don't get the NY times here. Could you transcribe the problem
here? (I'm at s.e.design, but crossposting to all of the above.)

Thanks,
Rich
SEE
http://tierneylab.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/04/13/jimmy-carters-killer-rabbi
t-puzzle/
 
"Oleg Kaizerman" <kaizero1@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:gua41c$idn$1@localhost.localdomain...
Maybe it would help if you used your real name, and not one stolen from
another person perhaps?
and what about U?:)
Brian L. McCarty went from being a successful sound mixer in LA, working
with Jeff Wexler, to a client of the Australian mental health care system.
He has been prescribed Clozaril and Risperdal, which are second line
antipsychotics, but apparently does not wish to take the recommended doses.

It is very sad for all of us. Mental illness is a tragedy for everyone it
touches.

Regards,
Bob Morein
(310) 237-6511
 
On Mon, 11 May 2009 13:23:44 +0100, Eeyore
<rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:

Archimedes' Lever wrote:

Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:
Archimedes' Lever wrote:
bill.sloman@ieee.org wrote:

We were, but cutting down on the chlorofluorocarbons seems to be doing
the trick.

You've obviously never seen the hole.

Quite a few suggest the hole was always there in the first place. It was
finding it that caused the panic.

No. They didn't panic. That is the point. The laser disc is from
decades ago.

It's my impression the 'popular meeja' panicked along with the greens and
tree-huggers.

Are you saying as I'm suggesting that the hole was indeed there a long, long
time ago ?

Graham

No. The hole was there a long time ago, but not likely the timeline
you have in mind.

It was/is man made. It was/is the result of CFCs, which are still
widely used in other countries, even though the US curtailed their use of
them well over a decade ago.

The fact that it has shrunk a little bit since then further proves that
we were the direct cause.

The ozone hole and global warming are not directly linked though. At
least not the way Gore wants everyone to believe that CO2 and GW is.
 
On Mon, 11 May 2009 13:53:53 -0700, Robert Baer <robertbaer@localnet.com>
wrote:

...for example, M$ "applications"

You are an "M$" retard! Any dope that jumped on that stupid bandwagon
is. You are one such dope.
 
On May 11, 3:56 pm, Fred Bartoli <" "> wrote:
Rich Grise a écrit :

On Sun, 10 May 2009 12:06:59 -0700, Tim Williams wrote:

Question the first: where to find transformer (or inductor) cores?

http://www.google.com/

At least you didn't suggested a PIC!
Damn, I like that. You'll, or no wait, Jan :) will have to send me
some PICs. Then I can put them across this transformer's secondary
and see what happens. >:-D

Tim
 
On Mon, 11 May 2009 16:59:49 -0800, "Paul Hovnanian P.E."
<paul@hovnanian.com> wrote:

Jasen Betts wrote:

On 2009-05-09, John Larkin <jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
On Sat, 09 May 2009 18:39:42 +0100, Nobody <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:

On Fri, 08 May 2009 18:50:23 -0700, Joel Koltner wrote:

Clearly manuals are the way to go if you want performance or really enjoy the
driving experience itself. For the basic need of getting people from point A
to point B comfortably with as little hassle as possible, it should be no
surprise that automatics are preferred.

Only in America (although automatic transmission seems to be gaining in
popularity in East Asia).

In the UK (and most of Europe), automatic transmission is still quite rare.

Automatics make a lot of sense in hilly landscapes. Hills are hell on
clutches.

automatics transmissions have clutches, dunno how long they last.

hills needn't be bad on the clutch in a manual transmission if you
match match the engine speed before engaging the clutch.

Match the engine speed with what? Zero RPM?

You've got to know your vehicle. Where the clutch engages and what
minimum throttle is required to provide adequate torque (without
scorching the clutch).
I don't think Jason has ever driven a car with a clutch.

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice:(480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

Lord protect me from queers, fairies and Democrats
 
In article <3qtf05l9s5dddpepkjci84m24iv69ot43t@4ax.com>, flipper wrote:
On Mon, 11 May 2009 02:57:51 +0000 (UTC), don@manx.misty.com (Don
Klipstein) wrote:

In article <quac05tgmikapg8c8bvh9m658bk479tbom@4ax.com>, flipper wrote:
On Tue, 5 May 2009 22:44:18 +0000 (UTC), don@manx.misty.com (Don
Klipstein) wrote:

In article <c0jvv49hplqsci0o3dm8hci8qq15s9tarq@4ax.com>, flipper wrote:
On Mon, 4 May 2009 14:32:56 -0700 (PDT), z <gzuckier@snail-mail.net
wrote:

On May 4, 1:29 pm, Raveninghorde <raveninghorde@invalid> wrote:

The antartic ice  is above long term trend:

http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/iphone/images/iphone.anomaly....- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

and the arctic ice is below long term trend
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/sea.ice.anomaly.timeseries.jpg

No, you mean it's below the cherry picked cyclical peak.

This is one reason why I wouldn't trust a 'climate change' advocate to
tell me if it were raining outside. They always cherry pick some
cyclical peak to compare against. If it's temperature they pick the
end of the little ice age and then, oh my, oh my, it's gotten warmer.

The past decade was warmer than even Loehle's reconstruction of the
medieval warm period.

That's not true and you're playing the same game of cherry picking
your data. In this case you're altering Loehle's reconstruction with
alternate proxies because you don't like the results his proxies
produced.

PLease try on your own to splice smoothed global HadCRUT-3 onto Loehle's
"Corrected Global Temperature Reconstruction" at any year both existed.

When I want to know what 'his' graph is I look at 'his' graph.

Quick, without looking, which are the 'gold standard'? Mann PC1
bristlecones or Ababneh bristlecones or Indigirka tree rings?

http://www.jennifermarohasy.com/blog/archives/002711.html

I think it's good enough to splice smoothed global HadCRUT-3 onto
Loehle's "Corrected Global Temperature Reconstruction" at 1890, 1900,
1920, or the (IIRC) 1925 termination pouint of Loehle's "Corrected Global
Temperature Reconstruction".

His corrected graph covers the same time frame as the original and you
'adjusting' it is not 'his' graph.
I am not adjusting anyone's graph - I propose splicing together two that
cover different time periods with a bit of overlap.

Loehle's original, that Eeyore has posted as a binary in this
newsgroup, goes to 1980 - at least according to the data file that a link
that comes with that graph (and not shown by Eeyore) links to. Without
the data file, appearance of the graph allows some to claim it goes to
more modern times still, since the publication mentions 1995.

http://www.ncasi.org/publications/Detail.aspx?id=3025

The PDF has two articles by Loehle. The second is the correction.

Meanwhile, I correct myself - the article says the covered period goes
to 1935, not 1925.

<SNIP>

- Don Klipstein (don@misty.com)
 
Jasen Betts wrote:
On 2009-05-09, John Larkin <jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
On Sat, 09 May 2009 18:39:42 +0100, Nobody <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:

On Fri, 08 May 2009 18:50:23 -0700, Joel Koltner wrote:

Clearly manuals are the way to go if you want performance or really enjoy the
driving experience itself. For the basic need of getting people from point A
to point B comfortably with as little hassle as possible, it should be no
surprise that automatics are preferred.

Only in America (although automatic transmission seems to be gaining in
popularity in East Asia).

In the UK (and most of Europe), automatic transmission is still quite rare.

Automatics make a lot of sense in hilly landscapes. Hills are hell on
clutches.

automatics transmissions have clutches, dunno how long they last.

hills needn't be bad on the clutch in a manual transmission if you
match match the engine speed before engaging the clutch.
Match the engine speed with what? Zero RPM?

You've got to know your vehicle. Where the clutch engages and what
minimum throttle is required to provide adequate torque (without
scorching the clutch).

--
Paul Hovnanian mailto:paul@Hovnanian.com
------------------------------------------------------------------
Ask not for whom the <CONTROL-G> tolls.
 
On May 11, 4:18 pm, "Soundhaspriority" <nowh...@nowhere.com> wrote:
"Oleg Kaizerman" <kaize...@gmail.com> wrote in message

news:gua41c$idn$1@localhost.localdomain...



Maybe it would help if you used your real name, and not one stolen from
another person perhaps?
and what about U?:)

Brian L. McCarty went from being a successful sound mixer in LA, working
with Jeff Wexler, to a client of the Australian mental health care system..\
Jeff Wexler. WTF happened to him? He seems to have fallen off the face
of the earth after never getting his MacFOH FFT RTA off the ground. A
lot of people bought the beta with the promise of a fully working
product being shipped in the near future. It looked promising. That
was several years ago. Emails not returned, web site dead, money
wasted. Lame.

Rupert
 
On Sun, 10 May 2009 20:13:50 -0700, John Larkin
<jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Sun, 10 May 2009 18:40:34 -0700,
"JosephKK"<quiettechblue@yahoo.com> wrote:

On Sat, 09 May 2009 16:39:50 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Sat, 09 May 2009 16:10:35 -0700,
"JosephKK"<quiettechblue@yahoo.com> wrote:

On Mon, 04 May 2009 12:32:33 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Mon, 04 May 2009 18:16:45 GMT, Rich Grise <richgrise@example.net
wrote:

On Sun, 03 May 2009 22:08:40 -0400, Spehro Pefhany wrote:
On Sun, 3 May 2009 17:32:18 -0700 (PDT), the renowned Greegor
On May 3, 7:23 pm, John Larkin

These crappy RatShack terminal posts are actually conductive!

http://www.radioshack.com/product/index.jsp?productId=2103639

A pair of them leak 12 pA to the chassis at +1 volt. If I ground
myself and hold the plastic screw part of one, it goes up to 20.

So I'll have to replace them with some Pomonas or something. What a
nuisance.

Pity; they do look nice.

0.000000012 Amp? LOL

No, that's 12nA. 12pA is 1/1000 of that:

0.000000000012 A

Doesn't humid air itself have that kind of leakage? ;-)

Cheers!
Rich

RH is 63% here right now, and I'm seeing about 5 fA. That's 5
microvolts across a 1G resistor.

Plenty good enough for testing diodes and jfets.

John



Is your resistor really that clean?

Seems to be. The test resistors are big long blue things from Digikey,
IRC maybe. I have a set of resistors from 1K to 5G ohms, each mounted
on a Pomona dual banana plug.

I'm using two DVMs, one to measure the upper (Z1) voltage and one
across the lower (Z2). I can short either pair of terminals and zero
out the respective DVM. If I plug in 1G and 5G resistors and apply a
few volts, I get a voltage ratio of 5.002. A good diode makes a nice
log curve down to 20 fA, which is comforting.

Being a little paranoid, I've done a number of cross-checks and
everything looks good so far.

I do have some surface-mount 100G and 1T resistors; maybe I'll ratio
them just for fun.

My ebay Keithley electrometer just arrived and seems to work. The
lowest range (on the analog meter) is 1e-14 amps full scale. It
measures the 1G and 5G resistors within a couple per cent. Looks like
this:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=200129040671&ssPageName=MERCOSI_VI_ROSI_PR4_PCN_BIX&refitem=130301449212&itemcount=4&refwidgetloc=closed_view_item&refwidgettype=osi_widget&_trksid=p284.m263&_trkparms=algo%3DSIC%26its%3DI%252BC%252BP%252BS%252BIA%26itu%3DFICS%252BUFI%252BUA%252BIA%252BUCI%26otn%3D4%26ps%3D10#ebayphotohosting

John

Sounds good, i presume you are taking steps to keep them clean?


At 5 Gohms, it doesn't seem to matter. I just tried a 100G 0805
surface-mount resistor; it read 95 G on the Keithley, 89 on my rig. I
tried cleaning the connectors and such with IPA and the resistance
went negative! Bad move. Looks like you have to be careful in the 100G
sort of range. Everything's baking now and may recover.

John

That's what i was talking about. It actually pays to be careful at 1G
Ohm and above.
 
On Mon, 11 May 2009 13:10:53 -0700, John Larkin
<jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Sun, 10 May 2009 20:13:50 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Sun, 10 May 2009 18:40:34 -0700,
"JosephKK"<quiettechblue@yahoo.com> wrote:

On Sat, 09 May 2009 16:39:50 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Sat, 09 May 2009 16:10:35 -0700,
"JosephKK"<quiettechblue@yahoo.com> wrote:

On Mon, 04 May 2009 12:32:33 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Mon, 04 May 2009 18:16:45 GMT, Rich Grise <richgrise@example.net
wrote:

On Sun, 03 May 2009 22:08:40 -0400, Spehro Pefhany wrote:
On Sun, 3 May 2009 17:32:18 -0700 (PDT), the renowned Greegor
On May 3, 7:23 pm, John Larkin

These crappy RatShack terminal posts are actually conductive!

http://www.radioshack.com/product/index.jsp?productId=2103639

A pair of them leak 12 pA to the chassis at +1 volt. If I ground
myself and hold the plastic screw part of one, it goes up to 20.

So I'll have to replace them with some Pomonas or something. What a
nuisance.

Pity; they do look nice.

0.000000012 Amp? LOL

No, that's 12nA. 12pA is 1/1000 of that:

0.000000000012 A

Doesn't humid air itself have that kind of leakage? ;-)

Cheers!
Rich

RH is 63% here right now, and I'm seeing about 5 fA. That's 5
microvolts across a 1G resistor.

Plenty good enough for testing diodes and jfets.

John



Is your resistor really that clean?

Seems to be. The test resistors are big long blue things from Digikey,
IRC maybe. I have a set of resistors from 1K to 5G ohms, each mounted
on a Pomona dual banana plug.

I'm using two DVMs, one to measure the upper (Z1) voltage and one
across the lower (Z2). I can short either pair of terminals and zero
out the respective DVM. If I plug in 1G and 5G resistors and apply a
few volts, I get a voltage ratio of 5.002. A good diode makes a nice
log curve down to 20 fA, which is comforting.

Being a little paranoid, I've done a number of cross-checks and
everything looks good so far.

I do have some surface-mount 100G and 1T resistors; maybe I'll ratio
them just for fun.

My ebay Keithley electrometer just arrived and seems to work. The
lowest range (on the analog meter) is 1e-14 amps full scale. It
measures the 1G and 5G resistors within a couple per cent. Looks like
this:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=200129040671&ssPageName=MERCOSI_VI_ROSI_PR4_PCN_BIX&refitem=130301449212&itemcount=4&refwidgetloc=closed_view_item&refwidgettype=osi_widget&_trksid=p284.m263&_trkparms=algo%3DSIC%26its%3DI%252BC%252BP%252BS%252BIA%26itu%3DFICS%252BUFI%252BUA%252BIA%252BUCI%26otn%3D4%26ps%3D10#ebayphotohosting

John

Sounds good, i presume you are taking steps to keep them clean?


At 5 Gohms, it doesn't seem to matter. I just tried a 100G 0805
surface-mount resistor; it read 95 G on the Keithley, 89 on my rig. I
tried cleaning the connectors and such with IPA and the resistance
went negative! Bad move. Looks like you have to be careful in the 100G
sort of range. Everything's baking now and may recover.

John



OK, > 1e14 ohms today after baking. IPA seems OK on teflon, but it's
hell on polyethylene type connectors and adapters. The Pomona dual
banana plugs are excellent.

John

Di-ethyllphthalate IIRC. Thermoset, very low G.
 
On Mon, 11 May 2009 19:28:35 GMT, Rich the Philosophizer
<philosobphizer@example.net> wrote:

On Fri, 08 May 2009 21:09:33 -0700, D from BC wrote:

If anyone sees, hears or feels leprechauns they should be checked for
schizophrenia, paraphrenia or other psychotic disorders.


You still haven't answered my question!

What exactly is it about you that makes it so important to you to
convince everyone that atheism is "The Truth"?
imo atheism is the least stinky bowl of sh*t when it comes to
something with the least amount of lies.

I'll be happy to believe in leprechauns if there's scientific evidence
for leprechauns.

You're worse than any Bible-thumping fundie; are you still trying to
convince yourself, because Santa didn't bring you that pony?

Thanks,
Rich
Nah...
I just like being ahead of my time.
It's also fun to ride the wave of growing atheism and be part of
history.
And, Christians are funny.

Which bizarrely reminds me of this scene from Goodfellas
Funny, How?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_ff46b58Hk


D from BC
myrealaddress(at)comic(dot)com
BC, Canada
Posted to usenet sci.electronics.design
 
John Larkin wrote:
On Sun, 10 May 2009 20:13:50 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Sun, 10 May 2009 18:40:34 -0700,
"JosephKK"<quiettechblue@yahoo.com> wrote:

On Sat, 09 May 2009 16:39:50 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Sat, 09 May 2009 16:10:35 -0700,
"JosephKK"<quiettechblue@yahoo.com> wrote:

On Mon, 04 May 2009 12:32:33 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Mon, 04 May 2009 18:16:45 GMT, Rich Grise <richgrise@example.net
wrote:

On Sun, 03 May 2009 22:08:40 -0400, Spehro Pefhany wrote:
On Sun, 3 May 2009 17:32:18 -0700 (PDT), the renowned Greegor
On May 3, 7:23 pm, John Larkin

These crappy RatShack terminal posts are actually conductive!
http://www.radioshack.com/product/index.jsp?productId=2103639

A pair of them leak 12 pA to the chassis at +1 volt. If I ground
myself and hold the plastic screw part of one, it goes up to 20.

So I'll have to replace them with some Pomonas or something. What a
nuisance.

Pity; they do look nice.
0.000000012 Amp? LOL
No, that's 12nA. 12pA is 1/1000 of that:

0.000000000012 A

Doesn't humid air itself have that kind of leakage? ;-)

Cheers!
Rich
RH is 63% here right now, and I'm seeing about 5 fA. That's 5
microvolts across a 1G resistor.

Plenty good enough for testing diodes and jfets.

John


Is your resistor really that clean?
Seems to be. The test resistors are big long blue things from Digikey,
IRC maybe. I have a set of resistors from 1K to 5G ohms, each mounted
on a Pomona dual banana plug.

I'm using two DVMs, one to measure the upper (Z1) voltage and one
across the lower (Z2). I can short either pair of terminals and zero
out the respective DVM. If I plug in 1G and 5G resistors and apply a
few volts, I get a voltage ratio of 5.002. A good diode makes a nice
log curve down to 20 fA, which is comforting.

Being a little paranoid, I've done a number of cross-checks and
everything looks good so far.

I do have some surface-mount 100G and 1T resistors; maybe I'll ratio
them just for fun.

My ebay Keithley electrometer just arrived and seems to work. The
lowest range (on the analog meter) is 1e-14 amps full scale. It
measures the 1G and 5G resistors within a couple per cent. Looks like
this:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=200129040671&ssPageName=MERCOSI_VI_ROSI_PR4_PCN_BIX&refitem=130301449212&itemcount=4&refwidgetloc=closed_view_item&refwidgettype=osi_widget&_trksid=p284.m263&_trkparms=algo%3DSIC%26its%3DI%252BC%252BP%252BS%252BIA%26itu%3DFICS%252BUFI%252BUA%252BIA%252BUCI%26otn%3D4%26ps%3D10#ebayphotohosting

John

Sounds good, i presume you are taking steps to keep them clean?

At 5 Gohms, it doesn't seem to matter. I just tried a 100G 0805
surface-mount resistor; it read 95 G on the Keithley, 89 on my rig. I
tried cleaning the connectors and such with IPA and the resistance
went negative! Bad move. Looks like you have to be careful in the 100G
sort of range. Everything's baking now and may recover.

John



OK, > 1e14 ohms today after baking. IPA seems OK on teflon, but it's
hell on polyethylene type connectors and adapters. The Pomona dual
banana plugs are excellent.

IPA will craze acrylic instantly, as well.


Cheers

Phil Hobbs

(Currently working on linearizing optocouplers. A volt or so of 20 MHz
helps the toe linearity amazingly.)
 
That leads to the question: why do you want to wind your own
transformer? It might be much easier to have a transformer wound which
meets your specs than failing a couple of times. At the power levels
you are talking about, a failure is likely to cause collateral damage.
I'm not too concerned about that (which, you're right to observe,
seems kind of odd given the ten kilowattedness of my ambition). I've
done this plenty of times before- junk ferrites are plentiful, but
small. The biggest cores I have are probably worth 2kVA together (and
that at 100kHz). Testing saturation and inductivity is easy, making
transformers is easy (especially when they have only ten turns). I
really just need the core to do it.

Getting a transformer wound feels like a huge waste of resources,
seeing as I just need the core (whichever size it has to be). I don't
need someone else to design it (assuming I get the correct core), and
I don't need someone else to wind it -- do winders even do 1/4 or 3/8"
copper tubing? -- I can do all that myself, no need to quadruple the
price of this project on services. Consider, BTW, that I am of the
age group where "money is short and time is free". ;-)

If you are serious about winding your own transformer I think you
might need to buy some cores first put some windings on them and
verify your calculations. Beware that the method of winding also
influences the behaviour of the transformer.
That should also not be a problem, about five turns of copper strap
around the toroid with one pipe down the center would be pretty fine I
think. If I need several turns secondary, I can either wrestle the
pipe through, or cut it into segments and fix it back together with
fittings (compression or flare, I'm thinking). The extra connections
won't do any favors for conductivity, but oh well.

Whereas, I suppose if I bunched all the primary turns to one side of
the toroid -- which is tempting, stiff as that copper strap is -- that
side would be more prone to saturation, which might produce
unfavorable results (sooner saturation, higher LL, etc.?).

Tim
 
"Paul Hovnanian P.E." <paul@hovnanian.com> wrote:
Uncle Al wrote:
RichD wrote:

Why is it, on paper currency the portrait is full
face, while on coins, it's profile?

Noses stick out in metal.

[Sigh] I guess we'll never have Dolly Parton on a coin then.
Didn't they once have a topless lady on the quarter?

Dave Greene
 
On Fri, 08 May 2009 14:42:33 -0600, don <don> wrote:

castlebravo242@att.net wrote:
"Rich Grise" <richgrise@example.net> wrote in message
news:pan.2009.05.08.18.54.35.23544@example.net...
On Thu, 07 May 2009 18:34:08 -0700, lynchaj wrote:
On May 7, 3:59 am, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelati...@hotmail.com
lynchaj wrote:
Hi! I don't know if there are any S-100 enthusiasts who are on SED
but on the chance you are here...
Are you serious ? S-100 went out with the ark.

The S-100 bus, IEEE696-1983 (withdrawn), was an early computer bus
designed in 1974http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S-100_bus
Yes, I am serious. Snarky comments aside, I am interested in both
vintage computing (S-100, CP/M, etc) and home brew computing (design
from scratch). Both are niche hobbies but have quite a bit in
common. Much of what we now associate with microcomputers originated
in the "Homebrew Computer Club" back in the mid 1970s and this project
is a bit of an homage to that exciting period in technological
history.
Are you talking about using off-the-shelf whole micros (Z80,...), or
building your own bit-slice machine? ;-)

I guess these days you'd do that with a CPLD or an FPGA, and a core. ;-)

Have Fun!
Rich


There used to be a kit for doing a bit slice Z80 on S100 board.

Bob

I have an 8080 and an 8008 S100 system laying around.

Bob


I just found a bag of AM2901 FOUR-BIT BIPOLAR MICROPROCESSOR SLICE.

http://pdf1.alldatasheet.com/datasheet-pdf/view/140822/AMD/AM2901BDC.html


Is this useful ?

don
If you want to build a bit-slice Z80, 8086, 68000, NS32000, 16, 32, or
64 bit mips, SPARC, or most any processor via bit slice for the fun of
it sure. Hey we could really have some fun with 74AHCT equivalents of
that series. Far faster and lower power.
 
On Fri, 8 May 2009 16:27:18 -0700 (PDT), lynchaj <lynchaj@yahoo.com>
wrote:

On May 8, 1:55 pm, Rich Grise <richgr...@example.net> wrote:
On Thu, 07 May 2009 18:34:08 -0700, lynchaj wrote:
On May 7, 3:59 am, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelati...@hotmail.com
lynchaj wrote:
Hi!  I don't know if there are any S-100 enthusiasts who are on SED
but on the chance you are here...

Are you serious ? S-100 went out with the ark.

The S-100 bus, IEEE696-1983 (withdrawn), was an early computer bus
designed in 1974http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S-100_bus

Yes, I am serious.  Snarky comments aside, I am interested in both
vintage computing (S-100, CP/M, etc) and home brew computing (design
from scratch).  Both are niche hobbies but have quite a bit in
common.  Much of what we now associate with microcomputers originated
in the "Homebrew Computer Club" back in the mid 1970s and this project
is a bit of an homage to that exciting period in technological
history.

Are you talking about using off-the-shelf whole micros (Z80,...), or
building your own bit-slice machine? ;-)  

I guess these days you'd do that with a CPLD or an FPGA, and a core. ;-)

Have Fun!
Rich- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Hi Rich! Thanks! Right now I am just focusing on making a good S-100
backplane. My next S-100 related project will probably be a PCB for a
linear power supply. IMO the biggest obstacles preventing more S-100
home brew hobbyist development is the lack of readily available
backplanes and power supplies.

As you know, S-100 has some rather unusual power requirements and its
difficult to come up with replacements. You can make you own linear
power supplies but they are usually huge and difficult to work with
things. I'd like to simplify it a bit.

Making S-100 cards has been done already so I'd like to work more on
the infrastructure before making new boards. The first board I'd make
though would be a new source of S-100 prototype boards. You can still
get them but they are hard to find and cost and too much IMO.

Thanks and have a nice day!

Andrew Lynch
I used to have an S-100 PS. It weighed 40+ pounds and was 6 by 10 by
5 inches. Use a switcher please.
 

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Back
Top