[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: GNATS meeting, and harmony/synergy
Subject:
Re: GNATS meeting, and harmony/synergy
Date:
Sat, 22 Mar 1997 18:19:14 -0500
From:
"Robert W. Stephens" <rwstephens-at-headwaters-dot-com>
To:
Tesla List <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>
> Date: Fri, 21 Mar 1997 23:58:23 -0600
> To: tesla-at-poodle.pupman-dot-com
> Subject: Re: GNATS meeting, and harmony/synergy
> From: Tesla List <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>
> Subject:
> Re: GNATS meeting, and harmony/synergy
> Date:
> Fri, 21 Mar 1997 01:22:59 -0800
> From:
> Open Minded <"unknown-at-apc-dot-net
>
> Tesla List wrote:
> >
> > Subject:
> > Re: GNATS meeting, and harmony/synergy
> > Date:
> > Thu, 20 Mar 1997 01:24:06 -0500 (EST)
> > From:
> > richard hull <rhull-at-richmond.infi-dot-net>
> > To:
> > Tesla List <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>
> >
> > >
> > >Richard,
> > >
> > >One thing that you mentioned and I forgot to mention is that Jeff and I
> > >tried getting the gap to work with just the primary and no secondary at
> > >all. Same flaming! This now indicates to me that the 6" secondary was
> > >taking energy out of the system and allowing the gap to quench.
> > >
> > >I am going to try an experiment sometime this weekend if I get the
> > >chance.
> > >I'm going to rig a pulley in the garage and attach a line through it to
> > >the top of the coil. Then while the coil is running I'll try to slowly
> > >raise the secondary and see where the output is the best. I figure the
> > >best output will imply the "best" use of energy.
> > >
> > >Here's another question -- If I really work on a gap system that allows
> > >me
> > >to produce a nice snappy spark on the rotary with no secondary in the
> > >circuit, do you think that I would then have a really excellent gap
> > >system
> > >that would Do Great Things, or would it be just an exercize? Of course,
> > >if
> > >no one knows, I can always try the experiment too.
> > >
> > >
> > >Chip
> > >
> >
> > Chip,
> >
> > This is one reason I usually opt for lotsa' turns in the primary. It
> > slows
> > the thing down a bit and quenching is a little easier.
> >
> > If you make a gap that doesn't flame with a 3 turn primary and a
> > moderately
> > large cap, you really have something! If you take a .01ufd and a 15
> > turn
> > primary, you should quench ok with two series static gaps! The gap
> > should
> > really be tuned and set for a specific system. Nebulous statement, but
> > a
> > bit of experimentation and hands on will soon have that synergy
> > flowing. An
> > experienced builder's best guess stands a far better chance of success
> > than
> > a Pspice model wielded by a novice.
> >
> > Richard Hull, TCBOR
>
>
> Richard -
>
> What about a rotary? I've got 0.06uF worth of primary C, and am
> running about 3-3/4 turns on my primary. No flames, but wicked
> 6' sparks out of the coil...I guess I did something right.
>
> - Brent
Brent,
Of course, nobody should try to argue with success, but like one of
your teachers, Bill Wysock, you have become a capacitor beater!(IMO).
I'm about halfway between your extreme of very low primary inductance,
and
the rest of the cool cats on this list. I have very successful coils
that operate with flat spirals in the 5-6 turn range. That
represents however somewhat more than twice the primary L that you
are using. With very low primary L , the primary circuit
intreconnection leadlength takes on a more significant role in
absorbing generated RF power through inherent off-axis inductance.
You are clearly routing your wiring in a good, low loss mode to get
such good performance out of a 3+ turn primary.
I recommend that you investigate employing an increased primary L.
The resultant reduced surge current will reduce power lost in the
gap, and will make your capacitors live longer.
rwstephens