Re: Tesla Coil Q Factors

To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
Subject: Re: Tesla Coil Q Factors
From: "John H. Couture" <couturejh-at-worldnet.att-dot-net> (by way of terryf-at-verinet-dot-com)
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1998 18:23:52 -0600
Approved: terryf-at-verinet-dot-com

  Bert Pool -

  Thank you again for the valuable info you and the your friends sent me
several years ago. Your data like the data from DR RESONANCE and Bert
Hickman was very complete compared to most of the data I was receiving.  It
was Bill Emery's coil data that appeared not to work well on the JHCTES
program. I finally realized the program was telling me that Bill's coil was
not a quarter wave coil but it was still in tune and that was why it was
working so well.

  I agree that coilers could use a good maggie program. This would take a
lot more empirical data than we have now. 

  John Couture

-----------------------------------

At 05:39 AM 8/27/98 -0600, you wrote:
>Date forwarded: 	Tue, 25 Aug 1998 23:36:08 -0600
>Date sent:      	Tue, 25 Aug 1998 23:08:50 -0600
>To:             	tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
>Subject:        	Re: Tesla Coil Q Factors
>Forwarded by:   	tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
>From:           	Tesla List <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>
>
>From: bertpool-at-ticnet-dot-com
>
>> 
>> 
------------------------------   snip

>>  John's
>> books and manuals provide excellent guidelines for all coil builders and
>> are especially invaluable to the new coil builders on the Tesla List. 
>> 
>> DR.RESONANCE-at-next-wave-dot-net

-------------------------------  snip

>I would like to second DC Cox's support of John's program and manuals.  I
>have 
>found both to be of great value, and that value comes from John using
>real-world 
>coils as the foundation for his program's calculations.  I too have sent
John 
>detail info on several different coils as a base-line.  Maybe one day we'll
>have 
>enough experience in magnifier construction to begin the process of
designing 
>a decent maggie program!
>
>Bert Pool