Re: Final test on new TC

To: tesla-at-poodle.pupman-dot-com
Subject: Re: Final test on new TC
From: Tesla List <tesla-at-stic-dot-net>
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 1997 22:58:41 -0600
Approved: tesla-at-stic-dot-net

Subject: 
            Re: Final test on new TC
       Date: 
            Mon, 24 Mar 1997 19:59:20 -0800
       From: 
            Skip Greiner <sgreiner-at-wwnet-dot-com>
Organization: 
            Greiner, Ltd.
         To: 
            Tesla List <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>
 References: 
            1

Tesla List wrote:
> 
> Subject:
>         Re: Final test on new TC
>   Date:
>         Tue, 25 Mar 1997 11:03:25 -0500 (EST)
>   From:
>         FutureT-at-aol-dot-com
>     To:
>         tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
> 
>         Skip Greiner wrote:
> 
> >  k: .19 with sec mounted 4" above top turn of primary
> 
> Great results Skip!    Interesting that your k value is close to the
> magic
> value of .22, it would be interesting to observe the pri. or sec. RF
> waveform
> now to see if you're seeing "deep and clean" beat notches which would
> indicate "magic value quenching action".  You might be quenching more
> quickly
> too with your present set-up.
> 
>    John Freau
> 
Hi John and All

I am presently looking at the waveforms and will report after I figure
it out. I still would like to find an easy way to look at the spark gap.
I have a great deal of difficulty believing that I am dissipating 400 or
500 watts or more as suggested by others on the list. I think when the
quenching is *right* the gap resistance is very low, much lower than
others predict. Otherwise I wouldn't have to turn on the furnace around
here, the output from the gap would br sufficient to heat the whole
house and those who are running pigs could heat their neighbors tooooo.

Skip