Re: More Mini Coils
From: John H. Couture[SMTP:couturejh-at-worldnet.att-dot-net]
Sent: Sunday, June 22, 1997 7:38 PM
To: Tesla List
Subject: Re: More Mini Coils
At 02:17 PM 6/22/97 +0000, you wrote:
>From: Malcolm Watts[SMTP:MALCOLM-at-directorate.wnp.ac.nz]
>Sent: Thursday, June 19, 1997 2:32 PM
>Subject: Re: More Mini Coils
> I should perhaps clarify something here....
>> I have a rather small coil here, running off a 12 volt
>> battery with a transistor interrupter. I get 4.5" streamers
>> when the input current is about 2 amps, so results are almost
>> identical to Malcom's. Interesting thing........ If I turn
>> the coil on in the dark, there is almost no discharge visible
>> from the 2.5" toroid. As the seconds go by the discharge increases
>> until there is a beautiful purple crown coming off the terminal.
>I wish to make it absolutely clear that I am not talking about 4"
>coronas, feathers and the like. I am talking about 4" of heavily
>ionized single channel plasma-type attached sparks (with most of the
>power concentrated in them). I can get 7" purple wisps
>concentrated in a band between the two resonators at that power level.
The only truly scientific way to obtain a reliable watts per ft of spark
is to use a controlled spark length. That is a horizontal CONTINUOUS spark
between the secondary terminal and a ground point. The continuous spark
means that a true wattage per number of sparks is obtained.
The single point to point spark can be a random maverick spark produced by
more than one break/charge thus increasing the estimated wattage per ft of
spark. This gives the capability of the coil on a one shot basis but cannot
be used as a watts per ft of spark rating.
With a controlled spark all of the variables are averaged out including
the spark length and the wattage. The horizontal spark removes the effects
of the heat convection of the air currents, etc.
I do not understand why some coilers are reluctant to adopt this method of
measuring spark length and wattage. It is a very simple measurement compared
to some TC measurements. I know that it does give less spark length but it
does make watts per ft of spark comparisons more accurate. This is
especially true of the wattage because the number of breaks/charges per
spark can not be determined.
A scope would not give this breaks/charges per spark information. A counting
device is required that would count breaks/charges for every spark produced.
Also, the wattage per break varies due to the charge left on the capacitor
from the previous break/charge. The continuous spark integrates these
variables over time and eliminates the unknowns.