Re: Ryan's Coil = DOA :(

["Tesla list" <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>]

Original poster: "Mike Novak by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-uswest-dot-net>" <acmnovak-at-email.msn-dot-com>

Bart points out a (my) reason for using a formless secondary: Low cost, with
low loss. It was originally my own solution to avoiding the exorbitant
prices of acrylic tubing over 2" in diameter. PVC losses are indeed quite
high which is why I think it should be avoided entirely. Not to mention the
fact that the winding form can be re-used, this method proves cheap and
efficient for the most part.

***IMHO- PVC and sonotube should be avoided ENTIRELY! The dissipation factor
is much to high for my liking. If your coil won't see many drops or scrapes,
use a thin polypropylene film form.***

My (other) $.02

-Mike Novak



> Original poster: "Barton B. Anderson by way of Terry Fritz
<twftesla-at-uswest-dot-net>" <tesla123-at-pacbell-dot-net>
>
> Hi Matt,
>
> Not necessarily. It depends on what type of form is used. Terry has
> measured the
> loss in a sonotube to appear quite high. However, losses in plastic forms
> is pretty
> low. For building a big coil at a low cost, sonotubes are the obvious
> choice and
> they work just fine. However, to reduce the sonotube loss, the sonotube
can be
> removed (they are designed for this exact purpose with cement pillars).
> Seems like
> a good method if building a large coil for max efficiency. I may
eventually
> do this
> with my own 12.75" sonotube coil. I've been thinking about it for years,
> but just
> haven't got around to it. If building a smaller coil where available
> plastic piping
> is cheap and easy to get, then that would be just as good as a formless
> secondary.
>
> Take care,
> Bart