Re: A primary question

Subject:  Re: A primary question
  Date:   Mon, 21 Apr 1997 11:20:17 -0400 (EDT)
  From:   FutureT-at-aol-dot-com
    To:   tesla-at-pupman-dot-com

<< Hi All
> I would like to pose a question for the list. Disregarding
> primary/secondary arc-over problems...what if one were to design and
> build three different primaries as follows:
> 1. a solenoidal wound coil of the approximate diameter of the secondary
> designed to a specific L. I think this coil could actually be a larger
> diameter without changing the premise.
> 2. a pancake wound coil of the same L with spacing to allow the
> secondary to fit in if necessary for k adjustment.
> 3. An inverted pancake coil of the same L designed using accepted
> techniques
> Now, the question.....Using the same secondary and adjusting the
> coupling to be equal for each of the three different primaries, will the
< TC function any differently in each configuration?
> I will appreciate any and all comments and discussion. I believe the
> design of the primary is the single most important part of a TC and I
> believe it has largely been ignored.
> Skip


If there's any difference, I think it would have to do with the shape of
field.  Certain field shapes may give a more "even" coupling, with less
likelyhood of racing sparks, or other breakdowns due to field
at a certain point, but this is speculation on my part.

You mentioned that your streamers do not arc down to your primary in
system, and this is certainly an advantage, although this is partly due
other system parameters too, as you have mentioned.

Certainly I would think there is room for optimization of these and
parameters, e.g. toroid dia. to primary dia. ratio, height to width
etc, all to the effect of minimizing voltage stresses, arc-overs, etc,
practical field control, and insulation-type concerns.  I don't know if
would go as far as to say that the primary is the "single most important
of a TC".  But clearly, your research is helping to answer these

Towards optimal coiling,

John Freau