[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: How should we measure coil efficiency, was neon vs. potenti




From: 	Peter Electric[SMTP:elekessy-at-macquarie.matra-dot-com.au]
Reply To: 	elekessy-at-macquarie.matra-dot-com.au
Sent: 	Saturday, July 26, 1997 6:55 AM
To: 	Tesla List
Subject: 	Re: How should we measure coil efficiency, was neon vs.   potenti

Tesla List wrote:
> 
> From:   John H. Couture[SMTP:couturejh-at-worldnet.att-dot-net]
> Sent:   Friday, July 25, 1997 2:08 PM
> To:     Tesla List
> Subject:        Re: How should we measure coil efficiency, was neon vs.   potenti
> 
> At 08:22 AM 7/23/97 +0000, you wrote:
> >
> >From:  Alfred A. Skrocki[SMTP:alfred.skrocki-at-cybernetworking-dot-com]
> >Reply To:      alfred.skrocki-at-cybernetworking-dot-com
> >Sent:  Monday, July 21, 1997 6:00 PM
> >To:    Tesla List
> >Subject:       Re: How should we measure coil efficiency, was neon vs.  potenti
> >
> ----------------------------------------------
> 
>   Alfred -
> 
>   Where did you find that higher frequency gives shorter sparks?  I believe
> it is the other way around.  The higher the frequency the longer the spark.
> 
>    Energy = hf    h = Planck's constant   f = freq.
> 
>    From the above equation the energy increases as the frequency increases,
> other factors being equal. This would mean when the frequency increases the
> spark length increases.
> 
>    But frequency is a minor factor. The major cause of air ionization is the
> voltage and the higher voltages give longer sparks.
> 
John,

Have you actually built a TC or do you just read textbooks and recite
formula's?

If you build a few you will find that Alfred is right here and the small
inductance, high freq. secondary TC's do generally produce shorter
sparks that are more "spray" like in appearance. I believe that the
really long, slow, branching discharges are only possible with lower
frequency, larger inductance secondaries. And, no, I can not produce a
formula to prove this!

Peter E.