[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: primary close to ground?



Original poster: Terry Fritz <teslalist-at-twfpowerelectronics-dot-com>

Hi Paul,

Forgive the late response, I have been super busy with other things lately...

At 06:55 AM 9/5/2003 +0100, you wrote:
>Malcolm wrote:
>
> > Having the primary close to the ground lowers its unloaded Q
> > (i.e.  with the gap shorted out) substantially.
>
>Perhaps we should be persuading Terry to hook up the pinger and
>scope, with a view to doing some more Q variation experiments.
>
>Previous experiments have looked at the Q of an isolated secondary.
>
>  http://www.abelian.demon.co.uk/tssp/qvar070402/
>
>It would be interesting to do something similar with a typical
>primary resonator, at various heights above the ground.

Yes.  The OLTC stuff never got going this summer as planned wither :-P  I 
did start on the paper though...  Also started my "own" science journal ;-))

www.jamsci-dot-org


>Another issue which could also be tackled is that of secondary
>grounding.  The relative merits of 'deep' grounding (ie long
>stakes); 'remote' grounding (running the secondary base out to a
>ground point some distance from the coil); 'shallow' grounding
>(lots of shallow stakes), and counterpoise (artificial ground
>plane), could be revealed in terms of their effect on the Q
>factor and resonant frequency.

In our Q testing, I had about 30 feet of shortwave antenna type copper 
stranded wire for "ground".  Goodness knows if that was good or bad.

As usual, so much to do in so little time...

Cheers,

         Terry


>--
>Paul Nicholson
>--