| ??? 05/28/06 14:00 Read: times |
#117198 - Yes, but... Responding to: ???'s previous message |
David said:
I always thought that slo-blo fuses allowed the selection of a fuse rating more properly matched to the normal primary current, whilst absorbing inrush current. You are right, but at small values there's not so much difference between the characteristics. I think it has also to do with the saturation of core. If in any case a huge short circuit current would flow, then it wouldn't matter, where you place the fuse. But many transformers are so soft, that when shorting, the primary fuse will take several minutes to blow, while at the same time the transformer dangerously heats up. Well, if never any disaster occured with the primary fuse scheme, why should the standards have changed then? I think some accidants must have happened in the past, so that they were forced to change them? I don't know... Kai |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| smps/linear ps. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| the moon is in the 3rd quarter | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Post circuit diagram | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Break of GND line? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Maybe he's forgotten the caps? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Any connection to Phone line ? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Have you examined the linear PS? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| one caveat | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| granted, but that's a misapplication. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| his question is why does it fail with 78 | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| True enough, but until he does the work | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| as usual | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Natural enemy | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Quite true, Kai | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| You are experienced, I see... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| I just wonder | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| When I need a clean signal | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| but then you have to clean up | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Fuse in secondary circuit. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Fuses | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Slow-blo? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Yes, but... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| schematic | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| no schematic here ... ??? | 01/01/70 00:00 |