diytube.com

Take the example of the Hammond trans with 9.58 H of pri L.

Ignoring many, many other considerations--- like copper current density,
insertion losses, parasitics, etc....

But just by looking at and evaluating what happens when you ratio a trans---

let's just consider it from this vantage point of the design having 9.58H of
primary L.

9.58 henries of L has the following impedances at these stated frequencies;

@ 20 HZ the inductive reactance will be 1204 ohms

@ 40 HZ the inductive reactance will be 2408 ohms

@ 80 HZ the inductive reactance will be 4816 ohms

@ 160 HZ the inductive reactance will be 9632 ohms

So, now at whatever low freq cutoff point you will accept take the inductive
reactance and put it in parallel with the reflected impedance (no matter whichor how many creative tapping games you want to play) and see what the "net" result is. The "net" being--- what is the effective primary impedance that the tube will be working into? And how reactive is it? How hard will it be to drive?

Is the shunt arm (i.e., the reactive component) larger than the purely resistive component?


The phase angle of the load--- i.e., the ratio btwn reactive vs resistive components will have a direct effect on the behaviour of your tube (i.e., the generator) in terms of both power delivery (i.e., insertion losses) as well as how much distortion the tube generates.


If it were possible to ratio transformers endlessly-- as an earlier poster suggested--- wouldn't transformer catalogs be relatively simple with perhaps one single offering per power level?


Well made transformers are finely tuned--- the wire sizes selected for a specific impedance, the insulation types and amounts selected for a specific impedance, the number of turns on the primary intimately related to the nominal design impedance.

When you ratio a transformer--- your essentially throwing all this good engineering out the window.


MSL