Received: from PCH.mit.edu (18.7.21.50) by mail.efplus.com (192.168.0.8) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.3.485.1; Thu, 10 Sep 2020 07:40:17 -0700 Received: from PCH.MIT.EDU (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by PCH.mit.edu (8.14.7/8.12.8) with ESMTP id 08AESQPL016038; Thu, 10 Sep 2020 10:28:45 -0400 Received: from outgoing-exchange-7.mit.edu (OUTGOING-EXCHANGE-7.MIT.EDU [18.9.28.58]) by PCH.mit.edu (8.14.7/8.12.8) with ESMTP id 08AESPEM016035 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Thu, 10 Sep 2020 10:28:26 -0400 Received: from oc11exedge2.exchange.mit.edu (OC11EXEDGE2.EXCHANGE.MIT.EDU [18.9.3.18]) by outgoing-exchange-7.mit.edu (8.14.7/8.12.4) with ESMTP id 08AESLQr004593 for ; Thu, 10 Sep 2020 10:28:25 -0400 Received: from w92expo16.exchange.mit.edu (18.7.74.70) by oc11exedge2.exchange.mit.edu (18.9.3.18) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1293.2; Thu, 10 Sep 2020 10:28:15 -0400 Received: from oc11exhyb7.exchange.mit.edu (18.9.1.112) by w92expo16.exchange.mit.edu (18.7.74.70) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1365.1; Thu, 10 Sep 2020 10:28:15 -0400 Received: from NAM10-MW2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (104.47.55.109) by oc11exhyb7.exchange.mit.edu (18.9.1.112) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1395.4 via Frontend Transport; Thu, 10 Sep 2020 10:28:15 -0400 Received: from MWHPR22CA0045.namprd22.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:300:69::31) by BL0PR0102MB3539.prod.exchangelabs.com (2603:10b6:207:19::28) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3370.16; Thu, 10 Sep 2020 14:28:13 +0000 Received: from CO1NAM03FT038.eop-NAM03.prod.protection.outlook.com (2603:10b6:300:69:cafe::4) by MWHPR22CA0045.outlook.office365.com (2603:10b6:300:69::31) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3370.16 via Frontend Transport; Thu, 10 Sep 2020 14:28:13 +0000 Received: from mail-il1-f178.google.com (209.85.166.178) by CO1NAM03FT038.mail.protection.outlook.com (10.152.81.212) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3370.16 via Frontend Transport; Thu, 10 Sep 2020 14:28:12 +0000 Received: by mail-il1-f178.google.com with SMTP id x2so5868272ilm.0 for ; Thu, 10 Sep 2020 07:28:12 -0700 (PDT) From: graham foulkes To: Microcontroller discussion list - Public. Sender: "piclist-bounces@mit.edu" Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2020 07:27:58 -0700 Subject: Re: [EE] Microwave Oven Transformers Thread-Topic: [EE] Microwave Oven Transformers Thread-Index: AdaHgE2fY6rWSK9zT2+K1YTuk0J55A== Message-ID: References: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , In-Reply-To: Reply-To: Microcontroller discussion list - Public. Accept-Language: en-US X-MS-Exchange-Organization-AuthAs: Anonymous X-MS-Exchange-Organization-AuthSource: TS500.efplus4.local X-MS-Has-Attach: X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-MS-Exchange-Organization-SenderIdResult: Pass X-MS-Exchange-Organization-PRD: mit.edu X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: received-spf: Pass (protection.outlook.com: domain of gmail.com designates 209.85.166.178 as permitted sender) receiver=protection.outlook.com; client-ip=209.85.166.178; helo=mail-il1-f178.google.com; dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=2zHRrnWCyWPQEfZ+OTq3gM5AXPIk/FOLxVDTXIy0KF8=; b=KC3JIcsMctMhXvFjXMlRMKMl8NXmsnUU+DmYj7vdiYtI49iR8AH0X+uKPbhK9KNTfu NmYzYaYh2YNiONx2YmjL4P5WRn5JzRb4UVVTJS6yNzpcI7L3vK11tZCITJ8RncPbOlJB yJqn8aUTLER+sC7SQ6SxKCL88RbJQWMOnbulmNPe28/2lG/DJ4Rs10ebittl4TnEWpzs STjg7G4u8aoDn/880wsv19bFolmDr7WYkj5apk81advxjK6D/W0OK8pkL4YPmwTCZclx LXLVJpIHPUInGcfIjHFCOq+kRmpecbc/1y/EV2VDcD1UFFGkoPv5s8XhA1T5bR8auROs WymA== authentication-results: spf=pass (sender IP is 209.85.166.178) smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com; mit.edu; dkim=pass (signature was verified) header.d=gmail.com; mit.edu; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=gmail.com; errors-to: piclist-bounces@mit.edu list-id: "Microcontroller discussion list - Public." list-post: x-beenthere: piclist@mit.edu x-mailman-version: 2.1.6 x-received: by 2002:a92:9954:: with SMTP id p81mr8561730ili.25.1599748091488; Thu, 10 Sep 2020 07:28:11 -0700 (PDT) x-topics: [EE] x-content-filtered-by: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 HI Bob There is a YouTube video, one of many about these Chinese inverter welders ,which addresses this issue of arc stability. It notes the poor arc strike capability at low current settings, no facts on electrode coatings, but similar solution, series inductor, which they miraculously cram into that miniature enclosure. They use, I think, a 30 mm powder iron toroid with a double layer wind of stranded wire. I bought two of these tiny welders, one 220 and a 120 volt version to see how well they perform. Not able to kill them so far! BTW, tyraps tend to stretch over time on stuff that warms up, good old fashioned cotton string works better, look at electric motor windings, they are always laced with twine. On Wed, Sep 9, 2020, 7:32 PM Bob Blick wrote: > Hi Ryan, > I needed an inductor good for over 100 amps. > > One of my welders is a tiny thing as small as a lunch box. It's very > convenient and efficient but doesn't like cellulosic electrodes, I want t= o > see if adding inductance in series improves things. More likely, it will > kill my welder after it kills the MOVs I add as protection :) > > There's very little real information available about why inverter-based > welders usually don't work well with cellulosic electrodes. A lot of talk > about open-circuit voltage not being high enough. That's clearly wrong, > since the open-circuit voltage only affects the starting of the arc, and > the problem here is the arc dying out. Cellulosic electrodes produce a lo= t > of hydrogen, which does raise the arc voltage slightly, but it should be > well within the welder's capability. I've run the welder on both 120 and > 240 volts to see if that changes things, and it doesn't, which it would i= f > the arc voltage was the problem. I think the real problem is the current > limiting in the welder getting confused by the aggressive percussive arc > that cellulosic rods produce. > > There is a whitepaper by ESAB(a welding equipment manufacturer) about the > topic, and they suggest that inverter-based welders need large inductors = in > order to use cellulosic electrodes. So that fits in with my hypothesis. > > Even if it works out, the inductor probably won't become part of the > welder, since it weighs as much as the whole welder. Just a little work > avoidance exercise here in my little corner of the hobby-sphere. > > Friendly regards, Bob > > ________________________________________ > From: piclist-bounces@mit.edu on behalf of Ryan > O'Connor > Sent: Wednesday, September 9, 2020 9:42 PM > To: Microcontroller discussion list - Public. > Subject: Re: [EE] Microwave Oven Transformers > > That's not many turns. What are you going to use it for? > > -- > http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive > View/change your membership options at > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist > --=20 http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist .