[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: Tuning Observations "parasitic tuning"
From: Malcolm Watts[SMTP:MALCOLM-at-directorate.wnp.ac.nz]
Sent: Thursday, July 24, 1997 7:37 PM
To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
Subject: Re: Tuning Observations "parasitic tuning"
Commenting:
> From: William Noble[SMTP:William_B_Noble-at-msn-dot-com]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 1997 4:45 PM
> To: Tesla List
> Subject: RE: Tuning Observations "parasitic tuning"
>
> wouldn't this effect then suggest that for big coils you want to dynamically
> tune the coil while it is running - once the streamer reaches a certain length
> the coil should be retuned (with the streamer formed) to keep it growing????
> I'll bet that a longer streamer would result. this is of course an
> interesting electromechanical design problem (and not one I need to tackle for
> my baby coil that I don't have time to play with)
I think Greg Leyh's big coil is arranged like that. I've not done it
myself but should at some stage. Tuning lower initially means that
the coil does pull itself into tune as the streamer grows.
Malcolm
>From tesla-at-stic-dot-net Sat Jul 26 00:38:06 1997
Received: from mail.stic-dot-net (mail.stic-dot-net [204.57.118.5])
by pupman.pupman-dot-com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id AAA08704
for <tesla-at-poodle.pupman-dot-com>; Sat, 26 Jul 1997 00:38:01 -0600
Received: from satnt2-133.stic-dot-net ([207.71.53.5]) by mail.stic-dot-net
(post.office MTA v2.0 0813 ID# 0-10265) with SMTP id AAA251
for <tesla-at-poodle.pupman-dot-com>; Sat, 26 Jul 1997 01:15:12 -0500
Received: by satnt2-133.stic-dot-net with Microsoft Mail
id <01BC9961.2288CF40-at-satnt2-133.stic-dot-net>; Sat, 26 Jul 1997 01:13:32 -0500
Message-ID: <01BC9961.2288CF40-at-satnt2-133.stic-dot-net>
From: Tesla List <tesla-at-stic-dot-net>
To: "'Tesla List'" <tesla-at-poodle.pupman-dot-com>
Subject: Re: Tuning Observations "parasitic tuning"
Date: Sat, 26 Jul 1997 01:08:42 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Malcolm Watts[SMTP:MALCOLM-at-directorate.wnp.ac.nz]
Sent: Thursday, July 24, 1997 7:37 PM
To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
Subject: Re: Tuning Observations "parasitic tuning"
Commenting:
> From: William Noble[SMTP:William_B_Noble-at-msn-dot-com]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 1997 4:45 PM
> To: Tesla List
> Subject: RE: Tuning Observations "parasitic tuning"
>
> wouldn't this effect then suggest that for big coils you want to dynamically
> tune the coil while it is running - once the streamer reaches a certain length
> the coil should be retuned (with the streamer formed) to keep it growing????
> I'll bet that a longer streamer would result. this is of course an
> interesting electromechanical design problem (and not one I need to tackle for
> my baby coil that I don't have time to play with)
I think Greg Leyh's big coil is arranged like that. I've not done it
myself but should at some stage. Tuning lower initially means that
the coil does pull itself into tune as the streamer grows.
Malcolm