[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: Tesla and Measurements.
-
To: tesla-at-grendel.objinc-dot-com
-
Subject: Re: Tesla and Measurements.
-
From: "Malcolm Watts" <MALCOLM-at-directorate.wnp.ac.nz>
-
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 1996 08:58:34 +1200
-
>Received: from rata.vuw.ac.nz (root-at-rata.vuw.ac.nz [130.195.2.11]) by uucp-1.csn-dot-net (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id NAA00824 for <tesla-at-grendel.objinc-dot-com>; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 13:58:46 -0700
Hi all,
Firstly, thanks to those taking part in this debate. Apart
from seeing some of these effects on scoping, I have arrived at my
conclusions mostly by looking for reasons why and from my knowledge
of matching in the radio world. If this helps in getting the most out
of systems that much money and effort has gone into then I am glad.
Mark asked...
> How much do you think the primary X matters (from an
> impedance matching point of view) when K = .2 or less?
To date I have not had the range of components necessary to do
definitive tests on this. I posted in the hope that others who
have access to these things might be able to do experiments where
I am currently in limbo, so any comments I make here have to be
speculative. My thinking is that it is always important. What I
don't have at the mo. is a way of quantifying these things
mathematically but I was hoping Ed Harris and Ed Philips might be
able to help here. What I do know is that power delivery per unit
time is dependent on k. So I guess that k taken with primary impedance
has an inverse relationship to the feed Z for the secondary. On
this basis, I would guess that the lower k is, the less rigorous
the primary spec. has to be. I think that considering the throughput
one can get from k = 0.1, I'd regard k = 0.01 as being relatively
insignificant. But I don't really know. I'm almost out of my depth
here. Help please Ed and Ed?
Malcolm