Re: Parallel or Series

To: "'Tesla List'" <tesla-at-poodle.pupman-dot-com>
Subject: Re: Parallel or Series
From: Tesla List <tesla-at-stic-dot-net>
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 1997 17:51:09 -0500
Approved: tesla-at-stic-dot-net


From: 	DR.RESONANCE[SMTP:DR.RESONANCE-at-next-wave-dot-net]
Sent: 	Sunday, September 14, 1997 3:57 PM
To: 	Tesla List
Subject: 	Re: Parallel or Series

To: David

Tesla also realized this later in his work and switched most of his systems
to a parallel gap as well.

DR.RESONANCE-at-next-wave-dot-net


 
> 
> From: 	DavidH8083-at-aol-dot-com[SMTP:DavidH8083-at-aol-dot-com]
> Sent: 	Sunday, September 14, 1997 4:59 AM
> To: 	tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
> Subject: 	Parallel or Series
> 
> 
> In a message dated 9/14/97 3:58:52 AM, Dr. Resonance wrote:
> 
> <<Always run the sparkgap in parallel with your xmfr.  After the gap the
cap
> goes in series with the top (tapped) end of the primary of the resonance
> xmfr. >>
> 
> This suggestion makes excellent sense to me, and yet it is exactly the
> opposite of the classic Tesla Coil schematic.  Or am I looking at the
wrong
> end of things here?  Also, I recently received a series of books on Tesla
> construction and design with maybe half dozen or so plans, and every
single
> one of them from the smallest tabletop to the biggest monster sticks to
the
> old classic schematic with the capacitor in parallel with the xmfr and
the
> gap in series.  Has there been a recent change of philosophy about this? 
The
> arc in parallel seems much more sensible, though I sort of hate to fly in
the
> face of Tesla's own design.
> 
> David Hutchison
> davidh8083-at-aol-dot-com
> 
>