Welcome
Username or Email:

Password:


Missing Code




[ ]
[ ]
Online
  • Guests: 25
  • Members: 0
  • Newest Member: omjtest
  • Most ever online: 396
    Guests: 396, Members: 0 on 12 Jan : 12:51
Members Birthdays:
All today's birthdays', congrats!
Matthew T. (35)
Amrit Deshmukh (60)


Next birthdays
05/05 Alexandre (32)
05/07 a.gutzeit (63)
05/08 wpk5008 (34)
Contact
If you need assistance, please send an email to forum at 4hv dot org. To ensure your email is not marked as spam, please include the phrase "4hv help" in the subject line. You can also find assistance via IRC, at irc.shadowworld.net, room #hvcomm.
Support 4hv.org!
Donate:
4hv.org is hosted on a dedicated server. Unfortunately, this server costs and we rely on the help of site members to keep 4hv.org running. Please consider donating. We will place your name on the thanks list and you'll be helping to keep 4hv.org alive and free for everyone. Members whose names appear in red bold have donated recently. Green bold denotes those who have recently donated to keep the server carbon neutral.


Special Thanks To:
  • Aaron Holmes
  • Aaron Wheeler
  • Adam Horden
  • Alan Scrimgeour
  • Andre
  • Andrew Haynes
  • Anonymous000
  • asabase
  • Austin Weil
  • barney
  • Barry
  • Bert Hickman
  • Bill Kukowski
  • Blitzorn
  • Brandon Paradelas
  • Bruce Bowling
  • BubeeMike
  • Byong Park
  • Cesiumsponge
  • Chris F.
  • Chris Hooper
  • Corey Worthington
  • Derek Woodroffe
  • Dalus
  • Dan Strother
  • Daniel Davis
  • Daniel Uhrenholt
  • datasheetarchive
  • Dave Billington
  • Dave Marshall
  • David F.
  • Dennis Rogers
  • drelectrix
  • Dr. John Gudenas
  • Dr. Spark
  • E.TexasTesla
  • eastvoltresearch
  • Eirik Taylor
  • Erik Dyakov
  • Erlend^SE
  • Finn Hammer
  • Firebug24k
  • GalliumMan
  • Gary Peterson
  • George Slade
  • GhostNull
  • Gordon Mcknight
  • Graham Armitage
  • Grant
  • GreySoul
  • Henry H
  • IamSmooth
  • In memory of Leo Powning
  • Jacob Cash
  • James Howells
  • James Pawson
  • Jeff Greenfield
  • Jeff Thomas
  • Jesse Frost
  • Jim Mitchell
  • jlr134
  • Joe Mastroianni
  • John Forcina
  • John Oberg
  • John Willcutt
  • Jon Newcomb
  • klugesmith
  • Leslie Wright
  • Lutz Hoffman
  • Mads Barnkob
  • Martin King
  • Mats Karlsson
  • Matt Gibson
  • Matthew Guidry
  • mbd
  • Michael D'Angelo
  • Mikkel
  • mileswaldron
  • mister_rf
  • Neil Foster
  • Nick de Smith
  • Nick Soroka
  • nicklenorp
  • Nik
  • Norman Stanley
  • Patrick Coleman
  • Paul Brodie
  • Paul Jordan
  • Paul Montgomery
  • Ped
  • Peter Krogen
  • Peter Terren
  • PhilGood
  • Richard Feldman
  • Robert Bush
  • Royce Bailey
  • Scott Fusare
  • Scott Newman
  • smiffy
  • Stella
  • Steven Busic
  • Steve Conner
  • Steve Jones
  • Steve Ward
  • Sulaiman
  • Thomas Coyle
  • Thomas A. Wallace
  • Thomas W
  • Timo
  • Torch
  • Ulf Jonsson
  • vasil
  • Vaxian
  • vladi mazzilli
  • wastehl
  • Weston
  • William Kim
  • William N.
  • William Stehl
  • Wesley Venis
The aforementioned have contributed financially to the continuing triumph of 4hv.org. They are deserving of my most heartfelt thanks.
Forums
4hv.org :: Forums :: Tesla Coils
« Previous topic | Next topic »   

Direct primary feedback

Move Thread LAN_403
Avalanche
Sat Jul 08 2006, 03:50PM Print
Avalanche Registered Member #103 Joined: Thu Feb 09 2006, 08:16PM
Location: Derby, UK
Posts: 845
I was wondering... is there any reason why feedback cannot be taken directly from the primary, without using a current sensing transformer?

I had this idea from a (new?) primary feedback scheme I have been working on recently, which takes the output of a single CT, and puts it across a potential divider which also loads the CT slightly. The centre of the potential divider is tied to ground, so each side swings positive in relation to ground, out of phase of course. These two outputs then feed a dual high speed comparator, configured as two zero crossing detectors. The outputs from the comparators are therefore inverted and non inverted drive signals at exactly 50% duty cycle. I hope that makes sense, I have had it working quite well but I'm still perfecting the whole thing. I guess I should draw up a schematic but it is fairly simple really. My controller originally had a center tap on the CT, but once I had eliminated this I realised it could probably be hooked directly across the primary with a suitable potential divider network.

Anyway, if you can visualise what I've just described above, is there any reason why I cannot simply remove the CT altogether, and hook a divider directly across the primary? Of course the resistor values would need changing, and more would need adding to get a center point, but they can be of a high value due to my driver not needing a particularly high current input to swing its outputs. Has anyone in the history of coiling created a solid state coil with direct primary feedback, and is there any reason not to do it despite the added complexity?



Back to top
Steve Conner
Sat Jul 08 2006, 03:53PM
Steve Conner Registered Member #30 Joined: Fri Feb 03 2006, 10:52AM
Location: Glasgow, Scotland
Posts: 6706
The voltage across the primary is affected by a whole bunch of things. If it were a pure inductor, the voltage would just be proportional to the rate of change of current, so you could integrate it to derive a current signal. But there's also the reflected impedance of the resonator to worry about.
Back to top
Avalanche
Sat Jul 08 2006, 05:57PM
Avalanche Registered Member #103 Joined: Thu Feb 09 2006, 08:16PM
Location: Derby, UK
Posts: 845
doh! I thought the current was always proportional to the voltage angry

So I suppose you'd need an infinitely high coupling between the primary and secondary for my idea to work at all...

Ah well, 2 stupid ideas from me in less than 24 hours, maybe I should take up... ...knitting or something cry
Back to top
JimmyH
Sat Jul 08 2006, 05:59PM
JimmyH Registered Member #358 Joined: Sat Apr 01 2006, 06:13AM
Location: UCSB
Posts: 28
You gotta remember that your CT is in *series* with the primary, and you're proposing to put the divider in *parallel* with it, so no, it's not gonna work like that.

It would be possible if you put your sense resistors in series with the primary, but you'd have to be very careful about isolation, what you think is ground, stray inductances, and your signal is only going to be a few millivolts, unless you don't mind wasting a lot of power. Remember, the CT steps down current, and steps up voltage.

Or... You can cough up the $0.20 that the ferrite cores from goldmine cost, and spend 2 minutes winding a CT.

Actually, if you're against using a CT for some reason, use the "antenna" method. I put this in quotes because I'm not talking about a piece of wire, but a capacitive feedback system that works the same way. The antenna is really just a small capacitor from the toroid to the antenna, so it can give a tiny feedback current.

This forms a "capacitive current divider", and then we stick our resistor/diode bridge in series with the small capacitor. We can do the same thing with primary feedback and the MMC. You just have to fix one side of the MMC to a DC potential (ground, + rail, - rail, etc...), and then put a small capacitor between the MMC and your current sense resistor.

That capacitor would have to do the full MMC voltage unless you tap off at a lower string, but the value can still be pretty low, so it should be that bad.
Back to top

Moderator(s): Chris Russell, Noelle, Alex, Tesladownunder, Dave Marshall, Dave Billington, Bjørn, Steve Conner, Wolfram, Kizmo, Mads Barnkob

Go to:

Powered by e107 Forum System
 
Legal Information
This site is powered by e107, which is released under the GNU GPL License. All work on this site, except where otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 2.5 License. By submitting any information to this site, you agree that anything submitted will be so licensed. Please read our Disclaimer and Policies page for information on your rights and responsibilities regarding this site.