[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
another question on secondary coatings
-
To: tesla-at-grendel.objinc-dot-com
-
Subject: another question on secondary coatings
-
From: EDHARRIS-at-MPS.OHIO-STATE.EDU
-
Date: Wed, 04 Oct 1995 16:03:42 -0400 (EDT)
-
>Received: from ns-1.csn-dot-net (root-at-ns-1.csn-dot-net [199.117.27.21]) by uucp-1.csn-dot-net (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA06086 for <tesla-at-grendel.objinc.COM>; Wed, 4 Oct 1995 14:04:28 -0600
Quoting RQ.
RQ> I have found that the benefits of a heavy coating on the
RQ> secondary far outweigh the advantages of a light or non-
RQ> existent coating. Also, there are a lot of beginners out
RQ> there. Beginners especially need the physical and electrical
RQ> ruggedness that a heavy coating provides.
Many of the coatings that people have mentioned in this group are
kinda loss. Even polyurethane is rather lossy, though in the thicknesses
used I would hope that the coil Q would not be degraded much.
My question
is this: have any of you measured coil Q before and after coating?
Last year, I made a coil on a PVC form wrapped with waxed paper and then coated
the coil with 2 coats of varnish. The form could then be removed from the
"free" standing coil which was held together with just varnish. I found that
the coil Q with PVC form was about 15% lower than without! But I never did the
experiment as a function of coating thickness....
-Ed Harris