开云体育

So, in your opinion, what could be the other element in the transformer to complete its LPF response since there is no load at its HV output?

That's because the leakage inductance is rather high.

Your answer is logical. But I was surprised when I tested a ready-made inverter, its HV output (of a conventional iron core transformer) was sinewave even without a capacitor as a load!

OP specified "pure sinewave inverters which use conventional *two-winding* iron core transformers."

Sounds like a ferroresonant power conditioner. Does that ring a bell? I don't think they are very efficient, but they are quite effective at producing sine waves from all kinds of nasty inputs.

The leakage inductance, in conjunction with the resistive part of the load, constitutes a 1st-order LPF. The stray capacitances are in most cases negligible in this respect.

The 'other element' is mostly the load resistance reflected into the primary circuit. ====================================================================================== Best wishes John Woodgate

I guess many of you, if not all, heard of pure sinewave inverters which use conventional two-winding iron core transformers. Their transformer is driven by a MOSFET bridge which, in turn, is driven by

Hello ! Does this suit you ? /g/LTspice/files/Temp/MAX31740.zip

Hello, Thanks very much.

Yes. You can use it in a text file with an .inc directive. OR You can place it on the schematic as .model statement, then use v49DL45 in the Diode symbol "value" attribute. However, remove

Hello, I found a PSpice model at Vishay. **** Copyright 2020 Vishay Intertechnology, Inc. All rights reserved. **** *produced by Vishay General Semiconductor Taiwan *Allen Su,

Ahh, yes; thanks very much. T

I think you have me confused with eetech00. My B-source expression didn't have a limit() function, which changes the discharge characteristic from linear to logarithmic. In any event, the order of the

Tony, since limit(x,y,z) is? equivalent to min(max(x,y),z) shouldn't your original limit expression have been written as although it doesn't seem to matter in this case.

This certainly appears to be a bug to me. Thanks for reporting it to us, at least. Donald

In case you haven't read any of the later messages, you should note that the discharge times the simulations produce are very optimistic because the PWL isn't working as expected. This is to do with

I meant: ..between 0s and 0.21s, you should see -1A. -- Regards, Tony

On 04/07/2023 00:00, Tony Casey wrote: > It may or may not be more convergence friendly, but your mod for B3 has > changed the discharge to be an incremental function of SOC, which it > wasn't before.

I believe I fixed the subcircuit. On the model now you just have to paste on the spice line "p=101325 d=3e-3 aa=100e-6". Subcircuit and symbol are labeled paschens-spark_gap, thank you.