Re: Safety FAQ is here -- draft, asking for comments.

>>From MALCOLM-at-directorate.wnp.ac.nzThu Aug  8 17:17:54 1996
>Date: Fri, 9 Aug 1996 10:21:41 +1200
>From: Malcolm Watts <MALCOLM-at-directorate.wnp.ac.nz>
>To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
>Subject: Re: Safety FAQ is here -- draft, asking for comments.

>Hi Robert,
>          Thanks for the thoughts on this.

>> I merely wish to say that I think more research is needed here 
>> before we can really understand what is happening around the top end.
>> As for your laudable attempt to create a performance category by merely
>> observing the discharge, this may not be so easy as first imagined.  
>> Standardization system or not however, I'm sure no one would object 
>> to having their system performance classed as #1! ;-)

>I think I'll can the categorization attempt. After seeing the 
>pictures in the Notes Guide, the operation does look fairly standard.
>My largest coil also exhibits attached streamers for a second or two 
>before losing interest and looking for another target. The discharges
>in the connected channel are definitely oscillatory and sinking 
>secondary power in a big way (critical coupling imposed).
>    Perhaps my imagination went West. I'd sort of imagined a bit of
>corona at the top with bolts _suddenly_ roaring out for miles and 
>attaching to a convenient object.



Don't give up yet on your idea for a discharge categorization scheme. 
See my post to you and Richard Hull.  BTW, I really like your idea of 
bolts_suddenly_roaring out for miles!:)

regards, rwstephens