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

Re: Why does top capacitance work? (fwd)



John H. Couture wrote:
> 
> >Date: Fri, 28 Feb 1997 17:36:47
> >To: Tesla List <mod1-at-pupman-dot-com>
> >From: "John H. Couture" <couturejh-at-worldnet.att-dot-net>
> >Subject: Re: Why does top capacitance work? (fwd)
> >
> >At 04:00 AM 2/28/97 +0000, you wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>---------- Forwarded message ----------
> >>Date: Fri, 28 Feb 1997 07:52:47 +1200
> >>From: Malcolm Watts <MALCOLM-at-directorate.wnp.ac.nz>
> >>To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
> >>Subject: Re: Why does top capacitance work? (fwd)
> >>
> >>A brief comment on this idea from John....
> >>
> >><snip>
> >>> I would be interested in hearing comments on how the true wattage input
> >>> could be metered so we can compare the classical TC with the magnifier.
> >>>
> >>> John Couture
> >>
> >>I think the comparison can only truly be made if k is the same for
> >>each system. A true power meter which takes the phase angles into
> >>account should do the trick shouldn't it?
> >>
> >>Malcolm
> >>
> >>----------------------------------------------
> >
> > Malcolm -
> >
> >I believe the comparisons should be made using the K that produces the
> maximum spark for the system. This is because the magnifier system requires
> a high K secondary but the classical coil uses a lower K. Only the input
> wattage would be fixed.
> >
> >I often wondered if a critically coupled classical coil would be superior
> to other combinations. I do not believe a critically coupled coil has ever
> been built. There are several parameters that have to be coordinated. Rp
> would have to equal Rs and Lm = sqrt(RpRs)/(6.283 F). Also Lm = K
> sqrt(LpLs).  Note that critical coupling involves more than only a single
> hump test.
> >
> >A true power wattmeter could be an electronic meter. Refer to Dave Sharpe's
> post. Phase angles could be ignored if you are only interested in true wattage.
> >However, if you are the supplier, you would be interested in the phase
> angle because this involves reactive currents you would have to supply.
> >
> >John H. Couture
> >