[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: A Puzzle
From: bmack[SMTP:bmack-at-frontiernet-dot-net]
Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 1997 10:42 PM
To: Tesla List
Subject: Re: A Puzzle
>
>
> From: Malcolm Watts[SMTP:MALCOLM-at-directorate.wnp.ac.nz]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 1997 6:03 PM
> To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
> Subject: A Puzzle
>
> Greetings All,
> This is a genuine enquiry (no, I don't know all the
> answers regrettably). Last night, I replaced the large resonator in
> my work system with a much smaller one with the same sphere on top.
> I am using the same primary but k would be somewhat different.
>
> The large resonator is a 10" x 44" space wound job (Ctot about
> 26pF). The small resonator is 4" x 17" and with the same topload
> resonates at exactly the same frequency as the large one. This coil
> has around 1800 turns of wire one it and consequently its inductance
> is much higher (which it would have to be to resonate at 146kHz as
> its Ctot is much less than the larger coil). OK, I know the wire
> losses are a lot higher in the small one so on to the next bit of
> information.
>
> Under single shot conditions, the spark length is pretty much
> the same as the large resonator so that implies that output voltage
> is pretty much the same. Now that is reasonable because of higher
> losses and possibly reduced k probably compensated for by reduced
> total capacitance.
>
> The cruncher: The large resonator has created those rare long
> sparks measured well over 4 feet p-p. The little one is struggling to
> get to two feet p-p. This is with exactly the same primary coil and
> cap, energy and gap setting. This situation echoes someone recently
> switching from a 3" (?) coil to a 6" one. The air discharges from the
> terminal are a bit shorter with the small one suggesting the reduced
> capacitance might be a factor. I have not as yet taken any real
> measurements but will sometime today.
>
> The question: why? Any input sought, Ideas welcome from all.
> I'd like to hear from anyone, no matter how trivial you think your
> contribution might be.
>
> Regards All,
> Malcolm
>
> Malcolm,
You have a good deal more experience than myself, so this reply
can be filed under "trivial.
Perhaps it's an experimental method problem. You wrote that "under
one shot conditions" the voltages were about the same. I don't know
what means were used to produce the one shot, but I suspect that
the release of energy may have been more abrupt than under normal
operating conditions. This would produce more voltage in the more
inductive device due to V= Ldi/dt .
Jim M
>