[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: New Testing
From: George W. Ensley[SMTP:erc-at-coastalnet-dot-com]
Sent: Sunday, September 14, 1997 9:44 PM
To: Tesla List
Subject: Re: New Testing
At 03:40 PM 9/14/97 -0500, you wrote:
>
>From: Malcolm Watts[SMTP:MALCOLM-at-directorate.wnp.ac.nz]
>Sent: Sunday, September 14, 1997 3:22 PM
>To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
>Subject: RE: New Testing
>
>Just speaking from my knowledge of transmission lines....
>
>> From: George W. Ensley[SMTP:erc-at-coastalnet-dot-com]
>> Sent: Sunday, September 14, 1997 12:59 AM
>> To: Tesla List
>> Subject: Re: New Testing
>>
>> Dr. Resonance,
>>
>> It is common practice in the electronics industry to use
>> shielded xmission line to carry data etc. from potentially
>> noisy devices. The shield is generally case/rf ground at
>> the offender (TC) and left open at the end attached to the
>> susceptible device (xfmr). I would presume that the added
>> capacity of the shield would act as additional rf bypass
>> to ground and help clean up any hash on the data/HV lines.
>>
>> Is there a flaw here? I wouldn't expect to see any
>> significant effects due to resonance at lengths in
>> 50ft range.
>>
>> George.......
>
>I would expect that the moment the gap fires, a pulse would indeed
>race back from the gap to the transformer. Moreover, I wouldn't
>expect _any_ type of line to behave much differently. Consider:
>you are slamming a short circuit across an energized line.
> I may, when time permits, remove my filter board from the neon
>setup and attempt to scope this. I am reluctant to do so however as I
>am planning to use that transformer for the job I am working on.
>
>Malcolm
><snip>
>
>
Malcolm,
It hadn't occurred to me that anyone would do this without the
filter board and safety gaps in place at the base of the TC.
RFI suppression is best accomplished at the source. I think
you are right about parallel conductors. They just form a higher
impedance transmission line with no choke sleeve.
George.....