To: | [email protected] |
---|---|
Subject: | Re: Re[2]: LF: Zmag of 45.6 Ohms OK, or should I try for better? |
From: | Andy Talbot <[email protected]> |
Date: | Mon, 2 Nov 2015 15:29:56 +0000 |
Dkim-signature: | v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=oC/v9Q8IWdYC+qA5ijHlsEi+OJx8DV6ozqayOGj3EHM=; b=JctvHPVohLqKPZdhCv3vYmPk5MqjRBpsWTpMQmLA1naFZi5s/OS/xsOlzxJ9zwE2v4 YLpGOcQJ7OJW/4pB15aLfxJCJwbQlQo3haKhpRrwPajO4zCIf7rUYT2jK+UzY4q1AJz1 RdrAKhQgeGytV/HPWAp8UrOQI84DF6byI9Rek1ci+BvJhXP+HiRlNM+vps8x+8CzxnrH dliwgP3SpOJSQlKEX0YkFFWNC++cIOW052wvpobm4v2myj7nD/Jb9zALjvjbUFo/vOHq TEKc79ZKNC02ahsG8UySgWpEodp7FmSK6gAxqV980jcLt0o9CuVcvBDDvkMIe+xvrm9L SogQ== |
In-reply-to: | <[email protected]> |
References: | <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <CAA8k23RPmHS1tb+H3=J0ZB0w-HEEY_deo5RSOy+dvVuwsFWN9A@mail.gmail.com> <[email protected]> |
Reply-to: | [email protected] |
Sender: | [email protected] |
That is not the core diameter - if it were it would be an ENORMOUS core. Chris responded in a PM with the core type it is ETD49 which has Ae = 211mm^2 Using Mike's 16 turns, and Bmax = 0.1T, that allows for 205Vrms and 840 Watts in a 50 ohms system Incidently, that 211mm^2 comes from a core diameter of about 16.5mm Andy G4JNT On 2 November 2015 at 15:17, Mike Dennison <[email protected]> wrote: Well, I specified the core type as Chris was originally using a |
<Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
---|---|---|
|
Previous by Date: | Re: Re[2]: LF: Zmag of 45.6 Ohms OK, or should I try for better?, Mike Dennison |
---|---|
Next by Date: | LF: VO1NA traces nr Moscow, Alex K |
Previous by Thread: | Re: Re[2]: LF: Zmag of 45.6 Ohms OK, or should I try for better?, Mike Dennison |
Next by Thread: | Re: Re[2]: LF: Zmag of 45.6 Ohms OK, or should I try for better?, Mike Dennison |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |