I know your last point and I agree.
I am glad, but I was not writing about the current direction for your benefit. I always think of beginners and lurkers that also read my replies. Nevertheless the Belkin's paper is not the best explanation of the pure DSR effect because he mixes the problem with the question of the core saturation. The core saturation is not an obligatory step of the process but just a possible improvement. The pulse can occur without core saturation.
That is true - the saturation effect is not mandatory. However, if the saturable transformer is used, then the flyback diode prolongs the time when the core is saturated. Actually, I am a proponent of the transformerless method because there are less variables to coordinate in a circuit without a saturable transformer. That's why I described such circuit hereSo we understand that the DSR pulse is not mainly due to the release of the diode charge but to the opening of the inductive circuit by the diode.
Correct. That's why the reverse current must be maximized and di/dt @ t 2 must be the greatest when the DSR diode interrupts the current abruptly. As the inductance of the secondary circuit is coupled to the primary, both have to be taken into account for the final result, using the coefficient of mutual induction.
That's where you go wrong, because as soon as the transformer's core becomes saturated, the primary and secondary windings become uncoupled. In other words, their coefficient of mutual inductance decreases drastically. That's why Mr. Belkin states, that after t 1, the primary charging circuit can be neglected.
« Last Edit: 2012-11-11, 04:05:36 by verpies »
|