[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: request for critique on some measurements
-
To: tesla-at-grendel.objinc-dot-com
-
Subject: Re: request for critique on some measurements
-
From: jim.fosse-at-bdt-dot-com (Jim Fosse)
-
Date: Sat, 16 Mar 1996 02:59:17 GMT
-
>Received: from bdt.bdt-dot-com (root-at-bdt-dot-com [140.174.173.10]) by uucp-1.csn-dot-net (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id UAA08469 for <tesla-at-grendel.objinc-dot-com>; Fri, 15 Mar 1996 20:01:26 -0700
tesla-at-grendel.objinc-dot-com On Fri, 15 Mar 1996 12:31:02 +0700, you
wrote:
>From: SKIP GREINER <sgreiner-at-wwnet-dot-com>
>Sometime ago I built three nearly identical secondaries. All were
>about 8 inches in diameter and the windings were 36 inches long
>consisting of #16 guage machine tool wire approximately .125" in
>diameter. One was a cardboard sonotube, second was polystrene tube
>and the third was built with three plates of .25" acrylic and 12
>.5" diameter acrylic rods. This made an open frame for the wire. All
>three tuned to about the same frequency but the acrylic unit far
>outperformed the other two units.
[snip]
>sonotube : 14
>polystyrene: 90
>acrylic : well over 400 and probably over 1000. beyond my instrument
> capability
>
>The difference definitely showed up in output discharges and I have
>built several more acrylic frames with excellent results. The 12" by
>36" coil driven by a single 12kv 60 ma neon gives close to 48"
>discharges point to point.
>
can you post the discharge results from the other tubes?
Skip,
Thanks for the research.
Could you go into more detail on how you built the acrylic form?
jim