Re: Secondary coil form questions (fwd)

To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
Subject: Re: Secondary coil form questions (fwd)
From: Tesla List <mod1-at-pupman-dot-com>
Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 21:11:56 -0700 (MST)
Approved: mod1-at-poodle.pupman-dot-com



---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 20:40:28 -0500 (EST)
From: richard hull <rhull-at-richmond.infi-dot-net>
To: Tesla List <mod1-at-pupman-dot-com>
Subject: Re: Secondary coil form questions (fwd)

At 10:51 PM 2/22/97 -0700, you wrote:
>
>
>---------- Forwarded message ----------
>Date: Fri, 21 Feb 1997 14:42:38 -0800
>From: Bert Hickman <bert.hickman-at-aquila-dot-com>
>To: Tesla List <mod1-at-poodle.pupman-dot-com>
>Subject: Re: Secondary coil form questions (fwd)
>
 snip


>> With Ed's system there are two primaries which share a common tank circuit.
>> assuming the primarys are wound in the same relative direction, the
>> secondaries would have to be wound oppositely to get maximum leap between
>> the pair!  (phasing).  The bottom line is one of the major coil windings,
>> primary or secondary ought to be reversed to get true half wave action.
>> 
>> I think I'm right on this one.
>> 
>> Richard Hull, TCBOR
>
>
>Richard & Ed,
>
>Couldn't you just reverse the phasing on one of the primaries instead if
>this was a problem?
>
>-- Bert --
>
>
>
>Bert,

Check my last sentence above...  I think that's what I said in the "bottom
line".  One major winding must be reversed.  Ed runs nice parallel primary
busses and crossing them would present a problem.  Thus, he wound his
secondaries oppositely and good thing, too!  I've seen his system kick butt
in person for several runs on two different visits.  He was kind enough to
supply footage for several of our video reports as well.  It is awesome.

Richard Hull, TCBOR