Re: Sparking behavior and a magnifier question
Subject: Re: Sparking behavior and a magnifier question
From: chip (Chip Atkinson)
Date: Mon, 11 Dec 1995 16:27:56 +0700
If the primary and extra coil oscillate at f, then the secondary should
be quarter wave reseonant at a substantially higher frequency near BUT
NOT EXACTLY EQUAL to 2f. You do not want resonance effects from the
secondary, only transformer action.
Hmmmm... Now I'm a little confused. Is the extra coil the base fed
coil that is producing the sparks? That means to me that we have a situation
Tank circuit driver coil Final, sparking, extra(?) coil.
. (Previous stuff deleted)
The above will absolutely work. The problem is the impedance of the
primary circuit with component values we are used to is too low and
would provide a bad match to the secondary.
Ahhh.... That brings me to the one question that has bugged me for years:
What is impedance matching? I kind of know the term, in that you need
the same impedance (ohms?) at a given frequency for maximum power transfer
in an AC circuit, but why? Is it possible to explain in "layman's terms"?
Here's another question that occurs to me: If I could create a tank circuit
that had standing waves in it, I should be able to connect the base of
an extra coil to an anti-node on the wave and, assuming that the extra coil
is tuned to the same frequency as the standing waves, get resonance/sparks
from the extra coil. The question really is, does the primary/secondary
of a magnifier setup provide a fixed anti-node (maximum oscillation) to
attach the base of the extra coil? (All this totally ignores impedance
matching, as I know little about it :-))