N.R.M.R.E. An investigation.

[itsu]

Yes
Primary 24 v
Secondary 240 v

Hmmm,  in my part of the world, the 240V would normally be the primary.

Itsu

[Grumage]

Dear All.

Attached is a photo of bits " missing " !!

[TinselKoala]

Hmmm,  in my part of the world, the 240V would normally be the primary.

Itsu

Sure, because normally (in any part of the world) with a step-down transformer you'd connect the 240 volt winding to the power source, and take the 24 volt winding to supply your load.

But it is certainly possible to connect the 24 volt winding to an AC power source of the right voltage and impedance, and then connect the 240 volt side to a compatible load. In this case (step-up) wouldn't you consider the 24 volt side the "primary"? What if the same transformer were labelled as a "step up" transformer rather than a "step down" transformer, would that make a difference in which side is called "primary" ?

This is why it is important to be very specific in questions and answers, particularly since we are dealing with many languages and many parts of this world.

I would like to get some clarity from Nelson himself on this issue. Which way does Nelson say the transformer should be connected, and please answer by using the words "24 volt winding" and "240 volt winding" instead of "primary" and "secondary". This way there can be no ambiguity... I hope.

[TinselKoala]

Dear All.

Attached is a photo of bits " missing " !!

So are you saying we do not actually have the complete schematic? Or that this device in the photo is not even the same one we have the schematic for?

If it is "just" a mini exciter radiant thing, I have a much simpler schematic that actually works, is repeatable,  and doesn't cause components to fail. It also looks much cooler.

OK, I need some clarity here.

1. Just what are the claims made for Nelson's circuit that we are examining here, other than that it causes components to fail and makes funny scopetraces?
2. Do we have the correct and complete schematic?
3. Which way around does _Nelson_ say the transformer needs to go, using the "24 volt" and "240 volt" winding terms, not "primary and secondary"?


Sorry if I seem a bit snippy this morning. I've been feeding trolls and while that is all good fun, it does get rather tiresome at times.

[Zephir]

OK, I need some clarity here.

1. Just what are the claims made for Nelson's circuit that we are examining here, other than that it causes components to fail and makes funny scopetraces?
2. Do we have the correct and complete schematic?

Sorry if I seem a bit snippy this morning. I've been feeding trolls and while that is all good fun, it does get rather tiresome at times.

Actually you just got finally relevant here. I did ask the same questions before two days already here - and I was deleted from here  with @grumage for being "offensive", "impatient" and "off topic" ("just wait, we are friends on background you know"). Whereas in fact I just denominated the problem of many threads in this forum clearly.