"Ian Iveson" wrote in message
...
Phil Allison"
** Better leave this para in since this is the one I referred to.
In addition to sensible advice so far, and linked to the turns ratio
thing...a transformer allows for thick, high-current output winding,
and thin (therefore compact, low-leakage etc.) primary. An
autotransformer could do the same but only by compromising the
advantages you state.
** Autos have less copper losses and much better bandwidth than
an isolation type.
Sometimes. Is that what ** means?
** Nope.
** Wanna compare figures on a 4:1 impedance step down toroidal with a 160
VA size core ?
Read the other posts that I agreed with. 4:1 is easy. 400:1 is nearer
what most people would use here.
** Even then it would not need to be inferior to a isolation type.
Neither would 160VA be appropriate in most cases.
** The same comment applies to a wide range of VAs .
Care to cite a reasonable comparison?
** Your face and a monkey's behind ?
Care to back up your statement about "much" wider bandwidth, in the
context of an OPT for a domestic valve amp?
** My remark sits quite well in the original context.
Can you think of any other important parameters other than copper losses
and bandwidth?
** None that relate to my comment.
Ever wondered why no-one uses, or supplies, auto-transformers for valve
amp OPTs?
** Never wondered at all.
The reason is so bleeding obvious.
............. Phil
|