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

Re: Optimum coil configuration



-- BEGIN included message





At 12:30 AM 3/11/97 -0600, you wrote:
>Return-Path: <tesla-request-at-pupman-dot-com>
>Received: from ns-1.csn-dot-net ([199.117.27.21]) by mail.stic-dot-net
>          (post.office MTA v2.0 0813 ID# 0-10265) with ESMTP id AAA48
>          for <tesla-at-stic-dot-net>; Mon, 10 Mar 1997 23:31:43 -0600
>Received: (from agent-at-localhost)
>	by ns-1.csn-dot-net (8.8.5/8.8.5) id WAA05524
>	for <tesla-at-stic-dot-net>; Mon, 10 Mar 1997 22:31:39 -0700 (MST)
>Received: from pupman-dot-com(204.133.95.34) by ns-1.csn-dot-net via smap (V2.0beta)
>	id xmaf05412; Mon, 10 Mar 97 22:31:24 -0700
>Received: (from slist-at-localhost) by poodle.pupman-dot-com (8.7.6/8.7.1) id
VAA31554; Mon, 10 Mar 1997 21:40:40 -0700
>X-Envelope-From: listown-at-poodle.pupman-dot-com  Mon Mar 10 21:40:39 1997
>Received: from localhost (listown-at-localhost) by poodle.pupman-dot-com
(8.7.6/8.7.1) with SMTP id VAA31542 for <tesla-at-poodle.pupman-dot-com>; Mon, 10
Mar 1997 21:40:39 -0700
>Date: Mon, 10 Mar 1997 21:40:39 -0700 (MST)
>From: List owner <listown-at-poodle.pupman-dot-com>
>To: tesla-at-poodle.pupman-dot-com
>Subject: Optimum coil configuration (fwd)
>Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.95.970310214034.31517B-100000-at-poodle.pupman-dot-com>
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
>
>
>
>---------- Forwarded message ----------
>Date: Sun, 9 Mar 1997 12:45:12 -0700
>From: Stanley Harle <lazer-at-earth.wazoo-dot-com>
>To: Tesla List <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>
>Subject: Optimum coil configuration (fwd)
>
>This is a forward of a message that I sent yesterday, but haven't seen
>appear on the list.
>
>Hi y'all,
>	I have been operating the following setup for a while now. Because
>of business trips, winter, laziness and various personal disasters, I
>haven't gotten to do as much experimenting as I'd like.  Lately, though I
>find that I'm having a bit more time to play (and it's been warmer)
>so I got to wondering about the consistently poor (in my view) performance
>that I've gotten from my coil.
>
>	The stats are:
>	2 15-at-30 neons
>	around 50 feet of 3/8" copper, 3/8" apart for primary
>		Primary is sometimes inclined for better performance
>	a CP .025 uF capacitor
>	6.5" X 27.25" secondary
>	various toroidal terminals
>
>	The system usual tunes at about 8.25 turns or so.  The best
>performance to date has been about 22", from the largest toroid that I
>have, about 30" X 3 made from drain duct for trailers.
>	Would I get better performance given the power limitations that I
>have from a shorter secondary?
>	Would a shorter secondary cause the tuning to move to less turns
>or more?
>	
>
>Stan Harle
>Alamogordo, NM

Stan,

I am of the school where a short l/d ratio is best.  However, a 10:1 ratio
is fine in diameters under 3".  Actually it is often demanded inorder to get
high inductance needed for voltage production.  I would imagine a 3" coil
might be best produced at about 15-20" in length and use #26-28 magnet wire.

The length of the secondary will not affect the tune movement as much as the
choice of cap and the method of wind on the primary and its inductance.  The
actual resonant frequency of the resonator must be met no matter what.  Your
tune is just what you wind up with.  If you want slow stepped tune, try a
.01 ufd with 20 turns in the primary!  This will be a slow tuner and reduce
the energy out too.  You can't have it all.


Richard Hull, TCBOR
>
>
>
>






-- END included message