[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: How should we measure coil efficiency, was neon vs. potential transformer
From: FutureT-at-aol-dot-com[SMTP:FutureT-at-aol-dot-com]
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 1997 3:15 AM
To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
Subject: Re: How should we measure coil efficiency, was neon vs. potential transformer
>snip>
><< However, comparing performance (Length/watt) between optimally sized
> coils may have significant merit. For every power level, there will be
> at least one coil in the population of all coils that has the greatest
> streamer length/watt. These would represent the most efficient coils in
> their power class by our sparklength/watt measurement criteria - the
> "state of the art" in coildom. However, for this to work, a consistent
> way of measuring input power and output sparklength is needed. The
> electronic opto-electronic wattmeter or simple 60 Hz analog wattmeters
> may suffice as long as we were consistent. Streamer length may require a
> more rigorous definition, like "attached streamer" not just one single
> "strike". The proposed square-law relating length to power level is not
> unreasonable... more coil data should provide more data points...
> Safe coilin' to you!
> -- Bert --
>>
Bert,
I'm thinking now (thanks to Greg's and Malcolm's suggestion), that we
should add the figure for capacitor energy, and measure our coils in two
steps; wallplug to capacitor...and capacitor to spark length...this way we
know which sections of our coils are efficient and whether the two types
(areas) of efficiency will co-exist or "rebel". (I'm a little leery of high
break
rates...concerned it will hurt efficiency in one way or another?)
My fear with the attached streamer measurement method is that it may
give an inaccurate correspondance to the free air, or occasional hit length.
If I understand Malcolm's recent experiment, the break rate altered the
ratio of attached vs. free-air streamer length.
Comments welcomed,
John Freau