Re: More melted stuff

To: tesla-at-poodle.pupman-dot-com
Subject: Re: More melted stuff
From: Tesla List <tesla-at-stic-dot-net>
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 1997 23:49:36 -0500
Approved: tesla-at-stic-dot-net
Subject: 
        Re: More melted stuff
  Date: 
        Thu, 10 Apr 1997 19:18:50 -0500 (CDT)
  From: 
        Bert Pool <bertpool-at-flash-dot-net>
    To: 
        Tesla List <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>


At 10:13 AM 4/10/97 -0500, you wrote:
>Subject: 
>        Re: More melted stuff
>  Date: 
>        Thu, 10 Apr 1997 00:43:42 -0400 (EDT)
>  From: 
>        richard hull <rhull-at-richmond.infi-dot-net>
>    To: 
>        Tesla List <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>
>
>
>>>
>>
>>Richard,
>>
>>Micheal Cranford suggested that I pre-test the dual coil by driving it with
>>a signal generator and adjust the outer coil's number of turns so that its
>>length/inductance/resonant frequency corresponds to the inner coil.  I think
>>it is a valid suggestion and I'm going to do this before I apply power. It
>>will be interesting to see how much difference there will be between the two
>>coils.  I'll post this, it could be of value to other experimenters.
>>
>>
>>Bert Pool
>>bertpool-at-flash-dot-net
>>
>>
>
>Bert,
>
>Might be a good idea, but in hot flaming action where the current
>courses
>hard and fast, the Fr's might move about a bit on their own.  Separately
>testing them with a sig. gen. might be just an innocent exercise....
>like
>tickling the dragon's tail.  Even in parallel, they are still mutually
>inductively coupled.  It ain't like two far removed coils in parallel.
>
>  In THEORY they should have the same currents and potentials on each
>after
>matching, right?......riigghhttt!  In theory, maybe, I think, I
>hope,.... oh
>please let them be the same!!!  
>
>Good luck.  It's by doin' crap like this that the whole business moves
>ever
>onward and upward.  When someone says it can't be done or won't work,
>that
>is like a signal to me that starts me movin off ta' do it.
>
>Richard Hull, TCBOR
>

By plugging the coil values into a spreadsheet using Wheeler's formula,
I
find that in _theory_, I will only have to reduce the length of the
outer
coil by 1 inch or so.  I will do this at the ground end of the coil
where
relative voltages are small.  Even as they sit, the the two windings are
identical to within less than a 2% tolerance.  Chopping off the outer
coil
that little bit should bring them within 1/2% of having the same
self-resonant frequency and inductance.

I just bought $60 of new 125 mil poly to wrap this secondary in.  I'm
mounting the top corona ring a couple inches higher, I'm insulating the
top
two turns of the primary cable, and I'm seriously thinking about cutting
a
cone shaped poly arc shield to go under the corona ring, something a bit
like Tesla's HV corona "funnel" that he used at CS.


Bert Pool
bertpool-at-flash-dot-net