27-06-2015, 01:11 PM
I quite like LTspiceIV - If your models are good, it gives pretty good results - you do have to know what you are doing though - just hacking at SPICE is not a great plan, nor is blindly relying on the results.
That said, I'm using Ronald Dekker's uTracer combined with Derk Reefman's ExtractModel tool to generate LTspiceIV models that match real, measured, tubes. Both Ronald & Derk are serious serious people - they really understand this stuff. Derk is Phillips' Head of Magnets (the bit that does magnetic imaging etc.) and Ronald is a professor at iTU and at Phillips Research.
The nett result is that the SPICE models acurately reflect REAL, MEASURED rather than theoretical curves. Neat. The current common library is at : http://www.dos4ever.com/uTracer3/TubeLib.inc
No question that for larger loads and extended running times, a current-transformer (CT) approach would be far far better, especially if space/cooling is constrained. 100% agree on that.
That said, I'm using Ronald Dekker's uTracer combined with Derk Reefman's ExtractModel tool to generate LTspiceIV models that match real, measured, tubes. Both Ronald & Derk are serious serious people - they really understand this stuff. Derk is Phillips' Head of Magnets (the bit that does magnetic imaging etc.) and Ronald is a professor at iTU and at Phillips Research.
The nett result is that the SPICE models acurately reflect REAL, MEASURED rather than theoretical curves. Neat. The current common library is at : http://www.dos4ever.com/uTracer3/TubeLib.inc
No question that for larger loads and extended running times, a current-transformer (CT) approach would be far far better, especially if space/cooling is constrained. 100% agree on that.
sıʌǝɹq ɐʇıʌ `ɐƃuol sɹɐ
ʞɔıu
ʞɔıu
