[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: Real data from real experiments.

>Date:          Tue, 12 Nov 1996 22:25:08 -0700
>From:          Tesla List <tesla-at-poodle.pupman-dot-com>
>To:            Tesla-list-subscribers-at-poodle.pupman-dot-com
>Subject:       Re: Real data from real experiments.
>Reply-to:      tesla-at-pupman-dot-com

>> > Subject: Re: Real data from real experiments.
>>> Subject: Re: Real data from real experiments.
>> > Subject: Re: Real data from real experiments.
>
>>From ccurran-at-execpc-dot-comTue Nov 12 21:46:57 1996
>Date: Tue, 12 Nov 1996 03:35:46 -0600
>From: Chuck Curran <ccurran-at-execpc-dot-com>
>To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
>Subject: Re: Real data from real experiments.
>
>Tesla List wrote:
>> 
>> > Subject: Re: Real data from real experiments.
>> 
>> >From hullr-at-whitlock-dot-comMon Nov 11 23:00:36 1996
>> Date: Mon, 11 Nov 1996 16:11:05 -0800
>?> From: Richard Hull <hullr-at-whitlock-dot-com>
>> To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
>> Subject: Re: Real data from real experiments.
>> 
>> Tesla List wrote:
>> >
>> > >From MALCOLM-at-directorate.wnp.ac.nzSun Nov 10 21:43:05 1996
>> > Date: Mon, 11 Nov 1996 10:51:14 +1200
>> > From: Malcolm Watts <MALCOLM-at-directorate.wnp.ac.nz>
>> > To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
>> > Subject: Re: Real data from real experiments.
>> >
>> > Brent,
>> >        There is an even better reason to use high Vcap, low-C in a
>> > primary....
>> >
>> > <masssive snip>
>> > > No charge is actually 'lost' - rather, it is simply re-distributed.
>> > > The total stored potential energy is reduced though, according to the
>> > > square of the voltage. Seems to me that this is exactly the reason why
>> > > we use small value capacitors with a heaping amount of very high voltage
>> > > in the primary circuit!
>> >
>> > Example : let bang size = E, cap = C, primary = L. Surge impedance =
>> > SQRT(L/C), peak current inversely proportional to surge impedance
>> > and gap loss proportional to Ipk.
>> >
>> > Let's double our surge impedance by halving C and doubling L (same
>> > frequency) and keep bang size up by increasing voltage to compensate
>> > for a drop in C.
>> > We now have Z surge = 2x original, V = SQRT2 x original voltage (keep
>> > E constant) giving current decreased by SQRT2, gap losses therefore
>> > reduced by SQRT2.
>> >     Okay, this all needs the appropriate calculus done to truly
>> > quantify peak values etc. but I think you can see the benefit
>> > attainable.
>> >
>> > Think I got that all right but stand to be corrected as usual,
>> > Malcolm
>> 
>> Malcolm,
>> 
>> I have long known and harped that the high L low C coil outperformed
>> other systems with the reverse set of parameters, but your explaination
>> is quite good and insightful.
>> 
>> Richard Hull, TCBOR
>
>Richard/Malcom:
>	I hope I am not repeating a question already asked,but here goes.  Is
>there a way you could suggest to select the best size cap for a given
>set of coil parameters?
>I have that new PVC form I mentioned and I am ready to start the primary
>component selection and construction.  The primary is a piece of 15 1/4"
>O.D. PVC and the coil will be 50" of #15 wire, or 831 turns. Primary was
>going to be 5/8" thin wall copper tube.  I was considering a .1 mfd cap,
>but I really do not have a feel for what exactly the primary L/C ratio
>should be for optimum spark.  Your comments woud be appreciated.  Thanks
>
>Chuck Curran

Chuck,

The 0.1 mfd sounds terrific. Build the damned thing!  Do the 
experiment!  I know that you want 'assurance'.  Phone an assurance 
company.  What the hell are _they_ good for anyhow?  I don't think 
anyone on this list can advise you closer to a winner coil than where 
you are at now.  This thing is gonna cook!

Just my opinion.

rwstephens