Re: Gap Losses

To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
Subject: Re: Gap Losses
From: Richard Hull <hullr-at-whitlock-dot-com>
Date: Mon, 30 Sep 1996 11:15:54 -0700
Tesla List wrote:
> 
> >> Subject: Re: Gap Losses
> >> >Subject: Gap Losses
> >Subject: Re: Gap Losses
> >> Subject: Re: Gap Losses
> >> >Subject: Gap Losses
> 
> >From couturejh-at-worldnet.att-dot-netSat Sep 28 14:56:07 1996
> Date: Sat, 28 Sep 1996 18:39:56 +0000
> From: "John H. Couture" <couturejh-at-worldnet.att-dot-net>
> To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
> Subject: Re: Gap Losses
> 
> At 04:26 AM 9/27/96 +0000, you wrote:
> >> Subject: Re: Gap Losses
> >> >Subject: Gap Losses
> >
> >From hullr-at-whitlock-dot-comThu Sep 26 21:46:35 1996
> >Date: Thu, 26 Sep 1996 10:11:00 -0700
> >From: Richard Hull <hullr-at-whitlock-dot-com>
> >To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
> >Subject: Re: Gap Losses
> >
> >Tesla List wrote:
> >>
> >> >From couturejh-at-worldnet.att-dot-netWed Sep 25 22:10:41 1996
> >> Date: Wed, 25 Sep 1996 22:08:02 +0000
> >> From: "John H. Couture" <couturejh-at-worldnet.att-dot-net>
> >> To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
> >> Subject: Re: Gap Losses
> >>
> >> At 04:25 AM 9/25/96 +0000, you wrote:
> >> >From rwall-at-ix-dot-netcom-dot-comTue Sep 24 22:21:55 1996
> >> >Date: Tue, 24 Sep 1996 04:18:51 -0700
> >> >From: Richard Wayne Wall <rwall-at-ix-dot-netcom-dot-com>
> >> >To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
> >> >Subject: Gap Losses
> >> >


Megasnip


> The 'easy way' test would have to be with a complete Tesla coil operating
> with a continuous stream of sparks from the secondary terminal (length not
> important). The load at the ammeter could then be considered at almost 100%
> POWER FACTOR. The advantage of this test, of course, is that many coilers
> have the equipment to try it but very few coilers, if any, will be able to
> do the other three tests.
> 
> I must admit the above is based on estimates made by me and all comments are
> welcome.
> I would be especially interested in comments from R. Hull and R. Wall.
> 
> Jack Couture
> JHC Engineering
> San Diego, CA

Jack,

I agree with all you say, but to me, the power input to my system is 
based on what I pay Virginia Power for runnin' the thing at the meter 
base.  Power output is the actual power contained in the sparks 
themselves.  The latter is very tough to measure.  I still would imagine 
that 20% return on the input power is a darned good coil.

Richard Hull, TCBOR