In Reply to: Saaaay... posted by Sector-7G on December 1, 2004 at 05:26:56:
Doug wrote:::::The load seen by each triode certainly does vary a bit. In the RDH3 an equation is offered which relates this change to plate resistance(for Triodes ). I am not sure I buy the whole thing.::::
As John Broskie points out... there is no intrinsic pri impedance. Pri impedance is determined solely by the load placed on the secondary and the turns ratio btwn the primary and secondary windings.
impedance ratio equals (n1\n2)^2
in pp each half pri's impedance ratio would be ((n1/2)\n2)^2
thus if the load on the secondary is 600 ohms and we have a 4:1 turns ratio (a 16:1 impedance ratio) from full pri to sec then the primary impedance will be 9600 ohms.
each half primary will have turns ratio of 2:1. Thus an impedance ratio of 4:1. Multiply this impedance ratio by the load on the secondary and we get an impedance of 2400 ohms for each primary half.
A tube or tubes, a generator or generators each work into the primary impedance they don't "make" or "define" the primary impedance which is determined solely by the load on the secondary and the turns ratios btwn the primary (or any sub-portion) and the secondary.
Thus, this is why, we can "ratio" transformers and change the primary impedance... simply by changing the load on the secondary winding.
The generator or tube may be more or less happy working into a given primary impedance... it may load the generator more or less than an alternative value of primary impedance... and the generator may develop more or less distortion operating into a given primary impedance.... but the generator or tube "sees" this impedance as it's load and works into this impedance... the generator or tube does not "define" or "make" the primary impedance.
as regards the behaviour of the tube and it's plate resistance and the "movement" of it's plate resistance... Steve Bench addresses this issue in his article on PP loadlines. I put a hot link to his text below.
msl
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Re: Saaaay... - mqracing 12/1/0406:32:24 12/1/04 (25)
- reflected impedance ...yes...yes - Tre' 09:08:08 12/1/04 (23)
- it is like that cell-phone ad... - Sector-7G 09:36:11 12/1/04 (22)
- Re: it is like that cell-phone ad... - mqracing 10:20:12 12/1/04 (21)
- Mike would you please answer one question - Tre' 17:05:28 12/1/04 (10)
- I'm confused... did everybody miss this class - Gordon Rankin 07:03:25 12/2/04 (3)
- Re: I'm confused... did everybody miss this class - dave slagle 13:27:41 12/2/04 (0)
- Re: I'm not confused :-) - PP model - Damir _the real one 09:40:51 12/2/04 (0)
- well then Gordon.... - Sector-7G 08:17:03 12/2/04 (0)
- Re: Mike would you please answer one question - mqracing 17:47:22 12/1/04 (5)
- So does all that mean AA/4? - Tre' 18:58:49 12/1/04 (4)
- Hey Mike, what did that post say? The one you just deleted - Tre' 21:40:36 12/1/04 (2)
- there is all sorts or silly stuff - Sector-7G 04:43:24 12/2/04 (1)
- or, welcome back the the Dark Ages - Sector-7G 10:11:36 12/2/04 (0)
- Mike, I re-read your post and I think you are saying... - Tre' 21:08:54 12/1/04 (1)
- since you refuse to look at what you requested.... - Sector-7G 10:49:24 12/1/04 (9)
- Re: since you refuse to look at what you requested.... - mqracing 11:51:15 12/1/04 (8)
- wow..did I do all that? *NOT* - Sector-7G 12:40:02 12/1/04 (0)
- bad... - Damir_the real one 12:03:44 12/1/04 (6)
- Yes Mike, would you return Damir's moniker? - Russ57 12:21:09 12/1/04 (5)
- I would if it were mine to return to him - mqracing 13:13:54 12/1/04 (4)
- Then I sincerly apologize - Russ57 15:49:53 12/1/04 (1)
- Re: Then I sincerly apologize - mqracing 15:58:41 12/1/04 (0)
- done by you, done in your name... - Sector-7G 13:39:24 12/1/04 (0)
- Re: I would if it were mine to return to him - Damir_the real one 13:34:26 12/1/04 (0)
- this is getting old... - Sector-7G 06:44:23 12/1/04 (0)