EDAboard.com | EDAboard.de | EDAboard.co.uk | WTWH Media

Variac current question

Ask a question - edaboard.com

elektroda.net NewsGroups Forum Index - Electronics - Variac current question

Goto page Previous  1, 2

Daniel47@teranews.com
Guest

Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:30 pm   



Lieutenant Scott wrote:
Quote:
On Fri, 04 Jan 2013 13:14:54 -0000, Daniel47_at_teranews.com
dxmm_at_albury.nospam.net.au> wrote:

Lieutenant Scott wrote:
On Tue, 11 Dec 2012 13:18:22 -0000, Daniel47_at_teranews.com
dxmm_at_albury.nospam.net.au> wrote:

Lieutenant Scott wrote:
On Mon, 10 Dec 2012 14:18:53 -0000, Daniel47_at_teranews.com
dxmm_at_albury.nospam.net.au> wrote:

Lieutenant Scott wrote:


Snip



Not possible, Scotty, you cannot have both Primary and Secondary
currents flowing in one part of the (primary & Secondary) winding and
just Primary current flowing in the remainder of the (primary)
winding.

Cannot happen!!

As for the phase relationships between totally separated Primary and
Secondary windings, this can depend on the load connected to the
Secondary (i.e. is the load purely resistive or capacitively
reactive or
inductively reactive. And the phase relationship would also depend if
the "top" or the "bottom" of the Secondary is connected to the
bottom of
the Primary winding!!

I know, because one cancels the other out, it's more like the magnetic
force pushing against the existing current and reducing it. But
you can
think of it as adding and subtracting currents.

Forget a transformer.....think of two series resistors with a centre
take-off point, say a nine ohm resistor and a one ohm resistor
with ten
volts applied across the combination. One amp of current would be
flowing through the two resistors, with nine volts developed
across the
nine ohm resister and one volt across the one ohm resistor.

Now, if you connect another resistor across the one ohm resistor, you
don't get an increase of current flowing through the one ohm
resistor to
provide the current that would flow through the additional resistor.

I find that more confusing - as a transformer is actually creating the
voltage on the output.


"a transformer is actually creating the voltage on the output" in
exactly the same way as, in your impractical transformer, the primary
current flowing through the "secondary" winding creates the secondary
current .......... *ain't going to happen!!*

Daniel

http://petersphotos.com/temp/transformer.jpg

Correct so far?

Where I've written "?A", it has to add up to 1.5A upwards, otherwise
you'd be getting current from nowhere - 3 amps has to come out of the
centre tap.

I see this as the 1.5A flowing down (round the source circuit), plus the
3A flowing up round the load circuit. 1.5 down plus 3 up = 1.5 up.

Sorry I've been away so long!!

Your diagram is not going to happen.....ever!!

Primary power = 240 Vp times 1.5 Ip equals 360 Watts
Secondary power = 120 Vs times 3.0 Is equals 360 watts

Secondary power equals Primary power, so no (i.e. zero, zilch) power can
be dissipated in the top half of the transformer, so zero voltage
developed across the top half of the transformer, so Vs must equal Vp,
i.e. 240 V not the 120 V your diagram shows.

Not going to happen....ever!! Sorry!!

Daniel

It was simply a rough diagram to work out the approximate current flow,
I was assuming no losses!


In my calculations I was assuming no losses, too, so it doesn't work, in
any case.

Daniel

Lieutenant Scott
Guest

Sat Jan 05, 2013 2:36 pm   



On Sat, 05 Jan 2013 11:30:14 -0000, Daniel47_at_teranews.com <dxmm_at_albury.nospam.net.au> wrote:

Quote:
Lieutenant Scott wrote:
On Fri, 04 Jan 2013 13:14:54 -0000, Daniel47_at_teranews.com
dxmm_at_albury.nospam.net.au> wrote:

Lieutenant Scott wrote:
On Tue, 11 Dec 2012 13:18:22 -0000, Daniel47_at_teranews.com
dxmm_at_albury.nospam.net.au> wrote:

Lieutenant Scott wrote:






"a transformer is actually creating the voltage on the output" in
exactly the same way as, in your impractical transformer, the primary
current flowing through the "secondary" winding creates the secondary
current .......... *ain't going to happen!!*

Daniel

http://petersphotos.com/temp/transformer.jpg

Correct so far?

Where I've written "?A", it has to add up to 1.5A upwards, otherwise
you'd be getting current from nowhere - 3 amps has to come out of the
centre tap.

I see this as the 1.5A flowing down (round the source circuit), plus the
3A flowing up round the load circuit. 1.5 down plus 3 up = 1.5 up.

Sorry I've been away so long!!

Your diagram is not going to happen.....ever!!

Primary power = 240 Vp times 1.5 Ip equals 360 Watts
Secondary power = 120 Vs times 3.0 Is equals 360 watts

Secondary power equals Primary power, so no (i.e. zero, zilch) power can
be dissipated in the top half of the transformer, so zero voltage
developed across the top half of the transformer, so Vs must equal Vp,
i.e. 240 V not the 120 V your diagram shows.

Not going to happen....ever!! Sorry!!

Daniel

It was simply a rough diagram to work out the approximate current flow,
I was assuming no losses!


In my calculations I was assuming no losses, too, so it doesn't work, in
any case.

Daniel

The diagram I drew at http://petersphotos.com/temp/transformer.jpg makes perfect sense to me.

If you create a secondary coil in the lower half and seperate the two circuits, it's just like a normal transformer.

--
http://petersparrots.com
http://petersphotos.com

System error 4C: kernel panic

Daniel47@teranews.com
Guest

Mon Jan 07, 2013 4:25 pm   



Lieutenant Scott wrote:
Quote:
On Sat, 05 Jan 2013 11:30:14 -0000, Daniel47_at_teranews.com
dxmm_at_albury.nospam.net.au> wrote:

Lieutenant Scott wrote:
On Fri, 04 Jan 2013 13:14:54 -0000, Daniel47_at_teranews.com
dxmm_at_albury.nospam.net.au> wrote:

<Snip>

Quote:
Sorry I've been away so long!!

Your diagram is not going to happen.....ever!!

Primary power = 240 Vp times 1.5 Ip equals 360 Watts
Secondary power = 120 Vs times 3.0 Is equals 360 watts

Secondary power equals Primary power, so no (i.e. zero, zilch) power
can
be dissipated in the top half of the transformer, so zero voltage
developed across the top half of the transformer, so Vs must equal Vp,
i.e. 240 V not the 120 V your diagram shows.

Not going to happen....ever!! Sorry!!

Daniel

It was simply a rough diagram to work out the approximate current flow,
I was assuming no losses!


In my calculations I was assuming no losses, too, so it doesn't work, in
any case.

Daniel

The diagram I drew at http://petersphotos.com/temp/transformer.jpg makes
perfect sense to me.

If you create a secondary coil in the lower half and seperate the two
circuits, it's just like a normal transformer.

If.....If.....If

What you drew *Will not* work! No if's, no but's, no maybe's!!

Daniel

Lieutenant Scott
Guest

Mon Jan 07, 2013 4:51 pm   



On Mon, 07 Jan 2013 15:25:06 -0000, Daniel47_at_teranews.com <dxmm_at_albury.nospam.net.au> wrote:

Quote:
Lieutenant Scott wrote:
On Sat, 05 Jan 2013 11:30:14 -0000, Daniel47_at_teranews.com
dxmm_at_albury.nospam.net.au> wrote:

Lieutenant Scott wrote:
On Fri, 04 Jan 2013 13:14:54 -0000, Daniel47_at_teranews.com
dxmm_at_albury.nospam.net.au> wrote:

Snip

Sorry I've been away so long!!

Your diagram is not going to happen.....ever!!

Primary power = 240 Vp times 1.5 Ip equals 360 Watts
Secondary power = 120 Vs times 3.0 Is equals 360 watts

Secondary power equals Primary power, so no (i.e. zero, zilch) power
can
be dissipated in the top half of the transformer, so zero voltage
developed across the top half of the transformer, so Vs must equal Vp,
i.e. 240 V not the 120 V your diagram shows.

Not going to happen....ever!! Sorry!!

Daniel

It was simply a rough diagram to work out the approximate current flow,
I was assuming no losses!


In my calculations I was assuming no losses, too, so it doesn't work, in
any case.

Daniel

The diagram I drew at http://petersphotos.com/temp/transformer.jpg makes
perfect sense to me.

If you create a secondary coil in the lower half and seperate the two
circuits, it's just like a normal transformer.

If.....If.....If

What you drew *Will not* work! No if's, no but's, no maybe's!!

Ok, please redraw my diagram showing me where you think the currents travel.

--
http://petersparrots.com
http://petersphotos.com

President Bush was in South Dakota recently. There was an awkward moment at Mount Rushmore when President Bush said, "Hey, look, it's those guys on the money!"
- Conan Obrien

Daniel47@teranews.com
Guest

Tue Jan 08, 2013 1:39 pm   



Lieutenant Scott wrote:
Quote:
On Mon, 07 Jan 2013 15:25:06 -0000, Daniel47_at_teranews.com
dxmm_at_albury.nospam.net.au> wrote:

Lieutenant Scott wrote:
On Sat, 05 Jan 2013 11:30:14 -0000, Daniel47_at_teranews.com
dxmm_at_albury.nospam.net.au> wrote:

Lieutenant Scott wrote:
On Fri, 04 Jan 2013 13:14:54 -0000, Daniel47_at_teranews.com
dxmm_at_albury.nospam.net.au> wrote:

Snip

Sorry I've been away so long!!

Your diagram is not going to happen.....ever!!

Primary power = 240 Vp times 1.5 Ip equals 360 Watts
Secondary power = 120 Vs times 3.0 Is equals 360 watts

Secondary power equals Primary power, so no (i.e. zero, zilch) power
can
be dissipated in the top half of the transformer, so zero voltage
developed across the top half of the transformer, so Vs must equal
Vp,
i.e. 240 V not the 120 V your diagram shows.

Not going to happen....ever!! Sorry!!

Daniel

It was simply a rough diagram to work out the approximate current
flow,
I was assuming no losses!


In my calculations I was assuming no losses, too, so it doesn't
work, in
any case.

Daniel

The diagram I drew at http://petersphotos.com/temp/transformer.jpg makes
perfect sense to me.

If you create a secondary coil in the lower half and seperate the two
circuits, it's just like a normal transformer.

If.....If.....If

What you drew *Will not* work! No if's, no but's, no maybe's!!

Ok, please redraw my diagram showing me where you think the currents
travel.

Scott, I don't have great graphics skills, but:-

http://www.albury.net.au/~dxmm/transformer_mod.jpeg

If you joined the primary and secondary 0V wires, you are left with a
three contact transformer!!

Daniel

Lieutenant Scott
Guest

Tue Jan 08, 2013 3:57 pm   



On Tue, 08 Jan 2013 12:39:50 -0000, Daniel47_at_teranews.com <dxmm_at_albury.nospam.net.au> wrote:

Quote:
Lieutenant Scott wrote:
On Mon, 07 Jan 2013 15:25:06 -0000, Daniel47_at_teranews.com
dxmm_at_albury.nospam.net.au> wrote:

Lieutenant Scott wrote:
On Sat, 05 Jan 2013 11:30:14 -0000, Daniel47_at_teranews.com
dxmm_at_albury.nospam.net.au> wrote:

Lieutenant Scott wrote:


Snip



In my calculations I was assuming no losses, too, so it doesn't
work, in
any case.

Daniel

The diagram I drew at http://petersphotos.com/temp/transformer.jpg makes
perfect sense to me.

If you create a secondary coil in the lower half and seperate the two
circuits, it's just like a normal transformer.

If.....If.....If

What you drew *Will not* work! No if's, no but's, no maybe's!!

Ok, please redraw my diagram showing me where you think the currents
travel.

Scott, I don't have great graphics skills, but:-

http://www.albury.net.au/~dxmm/transformer_mod.jpeg

If you joined the primary and secondary 0V wires, you are left with a
three contact transformer!!

In your diagram the current for the load should go the other way.

--
http://petersparrots.com
http://petersphotos.com

If the Internet is a superhighway, then AOL must be a fleet of farm equipment that straddles five lanes and pays no heed to "Keep Right Except to Pass" signs.

Daniel47@teranews.com
Guest

Thu Jan 10, 2013 12:11 pm   



Lieutenant Scott wrote:
Quote:
On Tue, 08 Jan 2013 12:39:50 -0000, Daniel47_at_teranews.com
dxmm_at_albury.nospam.net.au> wrote:

Lieutenant Scott wrote:
On Mon, 07 Jan 2013 15:25:06 -0000, Daniel47_at_teranews.com
dxmm_at_albury.nospam.net.au> wrote:

Lieutenant Scott wrote:
On Sat, 05 Jan 2013 11:30:14 -0000, Daniel47_at_teranews.com
dxmm_at_albury.nospam.net.au> wrote:

Lieutenant Scott wrote:


Snip



In my calculations I was assuming no losses, too, so it doesn't
work, in
any case.

Daniel

The diagram I drew at http://petersphotos.com/temp/transformer.jpg
makes
perfect sense to me.

If you create a secondary coil in the lower half and seperate the two
circuits, it's just like a normal transformer.

If.....If.....If

What you drew *Will not* work! No if's, no but's, no maybe's!!

Ok, please redraw my diagram showing me where you think the currents
travel.

Scott, I don't have great graphics skills, but:-

http://www.albury.net.au/~dxmm/transformer_mod.jpeg

If you joined the primary and secondary 0V wires, you are left with a
three contact transformer!!

In your diagram the current for the load should go the other way.

Yeap, so it should!! My mistake!!

Daniel

Lieutenant Scott
Guest

Thu Jan 10, 2013 9:17 pm   



On Thu, 10 Jan 2013 11:11:19 -0000, Daniel47_at_teranews.com <dxmm_at_albury.nospam.net.au> wrote:

Quote:
Lieutenant Scott wrote:
On Tue, 08 Jan 2013 12:39:50 -0000, Daniel47_at_teranews.com
dxmm_at_albury.nospam.net.au> wrote:

Lieutenant Scott wrote:
On Mon, 07 Jan 2013 15:25:06 -0000, Daniel47_at_teranews.com
dxmm_at_albury.nospam.net.au> wrote:

Lieutenant Scott wrote:



Snip




If.....If.....If

What you drew *Will not* work! No if's, no but's, no maybe's!!

Ok, please redraw my diagram showing me where you think the currents
travel.

Scott, I don't have great graphics skills, but:-

http://www.albury.net.au/~dxmm/transformer_mod.jpeg

If you joined the primary and secondary 0V wires, you are left with a
three contact transformer!!

In your diagram the current for the load should go the other way.

Yeap, so it should!! My mistake!!

Daniel

I still don't know what you're saying is wrong with my diagram http://petersphotos.com/temp/transformer.jpg

--
http://petersparrots.com
http://petersphotos.com

The tired doctor was awakened by a phone call in the middle of the night. "Please, you have to come right over," pleaded the distraught young mother. "My child has swallowed a contraceptive."
The physician dressed quickly, but before he could get out the door, the phone rang again.
"You don't have to come over after all," the woman said with a sigh of relief. "My husband just found another one."

Daniel47@teranews.com
Guest

Sat Jan 12, 2013 1:01 pm   



Lieutenant Scott wrote:
Quote:
On Thu, 10 Jan 2013 11:11:19 -0000, Daniel47_at_teranews.com
dxmm_at_albury.nospam.net.au> wrote:

Lieutenant Scott wrote:
On Tue, 08 Jan 2013 12:39:50 -0000, Daniel47_at_teranews.com
dxmm_at_albury.nospam.net.au> wrote:

Lieutenant Scott wrote:
On Mon, 07 Jan 2013 15:25:06 -0000, Daniel47_at_teranews.com
dxmm_at_albury.nospam.net.au> wrote:

Lieutenant Scott wrote:



Snip




If.....If.....If

What you drew *Will not* work! No if's, no but's, no maybe's!!

Ok, please redraw my diagram showing me where you think the currents
travel.

Scott, I don't have great graphics skills, but:-

http://www.albury.net.au/~dxmm/transformer_mod.jpeg

If you joined the primary and secondary 0V wires, you are left with a
three contact transformer!!

In your diagram the current for the load should go the other way.

Yeap, so it should!! My mistake!!

Daniel

I still don't know what you're saying is wrong with my diagram
http://petersphotos.com/temp/transformer.jpg

What!! Apart from me saying *it will not work!!*

In my diagram, the 1.5A primary current flows &only* in the primary
winding of the transformer and the 3.0A secondary current flows *only*
in the secondary.

Whereas in your diagram, *you* had both flowing in one part of *your*
coil, which would not work!!

No if's, no but's, no maybe's!!

Daniel

Lieutenant Scott
Guest

Sat Jan 12, 2013 1:09 pm   



On Sat, 12 Jan 2013 12:01:02 -0000, Daniel47_at_teranews.com <dxmm_at_albury.nospam.net.au> wrote:

Quote:
Lieutenant Scott wrote:
On Thu, 10 Jan 2013 11:11:19 -0000, Daniel47_at_teranews.com
dxmm_at_albury.nospam.net.au> wrote:

Lieutenant Scott wrote:
On Tue, 08 Jan 2013 12:39:50 -0000, Daniel47_at_teranews.com
dxmm_at_albury.nospam.net.au> wrote:

Lieutenant Scott wrote:








Scott, I don't have great graphics skills, but:-

http://www.albury.net.au/~dxmm/transformer_mod.jpeg

If you joined the primary and secondary 0V wires, you are left with a
three contact transformer!!

In your diagram the current for the load should go the other way.

Yeap, so it should!! My mistake!!

Daniel

I still don't know what you're saying is wrong with my diagram
http://petersphotos.com/temp/transformer.jpg

What!! Apart from me saying *it will not work!!*

In my diagram, the 1.5A primary current flows &only* in the primary
winding of the transformer and the 3.0A secondary current flows *only*
in the secondary.

Whereas in your diagram, *you* had both flowing in one part of *your*
coil, which would not work!!

No if's, no but's, no maybe's!!

Daniel

The current flowing in my load circuit has to come from somewhere. Redraw my circuit, with the same transformer, showing where you think current flows.

Daniel47@teranews.com
Guest

Sat Jan 12, 2013 2:40 pm   



Lieutenant Scott wrote:
Quote:
On Sat, 12 Jan 2013 12:01:02 -0000, Daniel47_at_teranews.com
dxmm_at_albury.nospam.net.au> wrote:

Lieutenant Scott wrote:
On Thu, 10 Jan 2013 11:11:19 -0000, Daniel47_at_teranews.com
dxmm_at_albury.nospam.net.au> wrote:

Lieutenant Scott wrote:
On Tue, 08 Jan 2013 12:39:50 -0000, Daniel47_at_teranews.com
dxmm_at_albury.nospam.net.au> wrote:

Lieutenant Scott wrote:








Scott, I don't have great graphics skills, but:-

http://www.albury.net.au/~dxmm/transformer_mod.jpeg

If you joined the primary and secondary 0V wires, you are left with a
three contact transformer!!

In your diagram the current for the load should go the other way.

Yeap, so it should!! My mistake!!

Daniel

I still don't know what you're saying is wrong with my diagram
http://petersphotos.com/temp/transformer.jpg

What!! Apart from me saying *it will not work!!*

In my diagram, the 1.5A primary current flows &only* in the primary
winding of the transformer and the 3.0A secondary current flows *only*
in the secondary.

Whereas in your diagram, *you* had both flowing in one part of *your*
coil, which would not work!!

No if's, no but's, no maybe's!!

Daniel

The current flowing in my load circuit has to come from somewhere.
Redraw my circuit, with the same transformer, showing where you think
current flows.

In my diagram of a couple of days ago, I have tried to use your
transformer, with 240V applied across the primary and 120V developed
across the secondary in a manner that *DOES* work, but *you* will not
see it.

You cannot see the difference!!

Daniel

Rheilly Phoull
Guest

Sat Jan 12, 2013 2:51 pm   



On 12/01/2013 9:40 PM, Daniel47_at_teranews.com wrote:
Quote:
Lieutenant Scott wrote:
On Sat, 12 Jan 2013 12:01:02 -0000, Daniel47_at_teranews.com
dxmm_at_albury.nospam.net.au> wrote:

Lieutenant Scott wrote:
On Thu, 10 Jan 2013 11:11:19 -0000, Daniel47_at_teranews.com
dxmm_at_albury.nospam.net.au> wrote:

Lieutenant Scott wrote:
On Tue, 08 Jan 2013 12:39:50 -0000, Daniel47_at_teranews.com
dxmm_at_albury.nospam.net.au> wrote:

Lieutenant Scott wrote:








Scott, I don't have great graphics skills, but:-

http://www.albury.net.au/~dxmm/transformer_mod.jpeg

If you joined the primary and secondary 0V wires, you are left
with a
three contact transformer!!

In your diagram the current for the load should go the other way.

Yeap, so it should!! My mistake!!

Daniel

I still don't know what you're saying is wrong with my diagram
http://petersphotos.com/temp/transformer.jpg

What!! Apart from me saying *it will not work!!*

In my diagram, the 1.5A primary current flows &only* in the primary
winding of the transformer and the 3.0A secondary current flows *only*
in the secondary.

Whereas in your diagram, *you* had both flowing in one part of *your*
coil, which would not work!!

No if's, no but's, no maybe's!!

Daniel

The current flowing in my load circuit has to come from somewhere.
Redraw my circuit, with the same transformer, showing where you think
current flows.

In my diagram of a couple of days ago, I have tried to use your
transformer, with 240V applied across the primary and 120V developed
across the secondary in a manner that *DOES* work, but *you* will not
see it.

You cannot see the difference!!

Daniel

Hey guys, why not check out the wiki for variacs ?

From what I see of your posts you are straying from reality!

Lieutenant Scott
Guest

Sat Jan 12, 2013 3:10 pm   



On Sat, 12 Jan 2013 13:40:39 -0000, Daniel47_at_teranews.com <dxmm_at_albury.nospam.net.au> wrote:

Quote:
Lieutenant Scott wrote:
On Sat, 12 Jan 2013 12:01:02 -0000, Daniel47_at_teranews.com
dxmm_at_albury.nospam.net.au> wrote:

Lieutenant Scott wrote:
On Thu, 10 Jan 2013 11:11:19 -0000, Daniel47_at_teranews.com
dxmm_at_albury.nospam.net.au> wrote:

Lieutenant Scott wrote:










Yeap, so it should!! My mistake!!

Daniel

I still don't know what you're saying is wrong with my diagram
http://petersphotos.com/temp/transformer.jpg

What!! Apart from me saying *it will not work!!*

In my diagram, the 1.5A primary current flows &only* in the primary
winding of the transformer and the 3.0A secondary current flows *only*
in the secondary.

Whereas in your diagram, *you* had both flowing in one part of *your*
coil, which would not work!!

No if's, no but's, no maybe's!!

Daniel

The current flowing in my load circuit has to come from somewhere.
Redraw my circuit, with the same transformer, showing where you think
current flows.

In my diagram of a couple of days ago, I have tried to use your
transformer, with 240V applied across the primary and 120V developed
across the secondary in a manner that *DOES* work, but *you* will not
see it.

You cannot see the difference!!

You're not showing a Variac in your diagram. The Variac has the source voltage across the ENTIRE coil. The load is connected across HALF the coil.

--
http://petersparrots.com
http://petersphotos.com

British Rail Customer: "How much does it cost to Bath on the train?"
Operator: "If you can get your feet in the sink, then it's free".

Lieutenant Scott
Guest

Sat Jan 12, 2013 3:12 pm   



On Sat, 12 Jan 2013 13:51:33 -0000, Rheilly Phoull <rheilly_at_bigslong.com> wrote:

Quote:
On 12/01/2013 9:40 PM, Daniel47_at_teranews.com wrote:
Lieutenant Scott wrote:
On Sat, 12 Jan 2013 12:01:02 -0000, Daniel47_at_teranews.com
dxmm_at_albury.nospam.net.au> wrote:

Lieutenant Scott wrote:
On Thu, 10 Jan 2013 11:11:19 -0000, Daniel47_at_teranews.com
dxmm_at_albury.nospam.net.au> wrote:











I still don't know what you're saying is wrong with my diagram
http://petersphotos.com/temp/transformer.jpg

What!! Apart from me saying *it will not work!!*

In my diagram, the 1.5A primary current flows &only* in the primary
winding of the transformer and the 3.0A secondary current flows *only*
in the secondary.

Whereas in your diagram, *you* had both flowing in one part of *your*
coil, which would not work!!

No if's, no but's, no maybe's!!

Daniel

The current flowing in my load circuit has to come from somewhere.
Redraw my circuit, with the same transformer, showing where you think
current flows.

In my diagram of a couple of days ago, I have tried to use your
transformer, with 240V applied across the primary and 120V developed
across the secondary in a manner that *DOES* work, but *you* will not
see it.

You cannot see the difference!!

Daniel

Hey guys, why not check out the wiki for variacs ?
From what I see of your posts you are straying from reality!

Where is it located?

--
http://petersparrots.com
http://petersphotos.com

The little boat gently drifted across the pond exactly the way a bowling ball wouldn't.

Goto page Previous  1, 2

elektroda.net NewsGroups Forum Index - Electronics - Variac current question

Ask a question - edaboard.com

Arabic version Bulgarian version Catalan version Czech version Danish version German version Greek version English version Spanish version Finnish version French version Hindi version Croatian version Indonesian version Italian version Hebrew version Japanese version Korean version Lithuanian version Latvian version Dutch version Norwegian version Polish version Portuguese version Romanian version Russian version Slovak version Slovenian version Serbian version Swedish version Tagalog version Ukrainian version Vietnamese version Chinese version Turkish version
EDAboard.com map