Re: How to rise the secondary? (fwd)
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sun, 19 Jul 1998 06:07:34 +0000
From: "John H. Couture" <couturejh-at-worldnet.att-dot-net>
To: Tesla List <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>
Subject: Re: How to rise the secondary? (fwd)
Bart, All -
I guess the botton line is "Do you believe that a TC with properly
designed pri/sec clearance to prevent sparkovers between the coils will or
will not give longer output sparks than the "raising the secondary" TC ? All
other parameters unchanged.
Some comments on your post -
1. "Undercoupled - there is less energy transferred". This is contrary to
theory. However, coupling and tuning may be inseparable and tuning affects
energy transfer. (I'm giving in to my critics).
2. Undercoupled (too far away) not enough current, etc. - There is no
current to transfer energy from the pri to sec coil, only magnetic flux.
There is never any loss of magnetic flux when transferring energy between
the coils. Why?
3. Favorably coupled - what is the relationship between coupled, current,
and quenching? Equations?
4. K beyond our reach -Quenching is not energy transfer. Quenching is
turning off the operating spark, preferably at the right time.
5. I agree there are no programs that take into account sparkgap
quenching. But I don't agree that coupling is a hit or miss condition.
Otherwise those "raising the secondary" precise adjustments that coilers are
talking about are not precise. Proper coupling to prevent sparkovers can be
determined by following what coilers have done in the past.
6. Spice is a program that uses theoretical electronic equations. If it
was "to shape the em field" without empirical data it would not conform to
real world coils. Like trying to find the true capacitance of a toroid on a TC.
At 01:50 PM 7/18/98 -0600, you wrote:
>---------- Forwarded message ----------
>Date: Sat, 18 Jul 1998 10:00:03 -0500
>From: "Barton B. Anderson" <mopar-at-uswest-dot-net>
>To: Tesla List <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>
>Subject: Re: How to rise the secondary? (fwd)
>Coupling is two-fold. First, coupling is a coefficient of magnetic flux linking
>inductors resulting in some amount of energy transfered.
>Secondly, coupling should also be realized as a very real physical energy
>What is it were coupling? Well, a voltage potential producing current in
>causing a magnetic field to be generated thus coupling the secondary.
>is a magnetic field we are coupling, and magnetic fields move in "size and
>*with and by* the AC component (em field).
>An em field produced in the primary will have a varying size , position, and
>density. Current determines these parameters of the em field once the
>secondary are in place, and quenching determines the amount of current
>By *theory*, if we are "over-coupled" (too close, too much current, large
>the em field flux lines of force "does not" engage optimally and there is less
>energy transfered than what could be. If we are "under-coupled" (too far
>enough current, small em field), the em field flux lines of force "does
>optimally and again there is less energy transfered than what could be.
>With TC's, I theorize that regardless of under of over coupled conditions,
>of Pri to Sec arcing is set to prevent a *voltage* determined occurance.
>not mean we are favorably coupled. It only means the Pri is far enough away
>Sec to prevent arcing based on *current* and *quenching* conditions.
>lowering the secondary *does* change the coupling due to the positioning
>It is very possible, that due to the voltage level on the primary, our
>most efficient K is beyond our reach with present design. Because quenching
>transfer) changes the current/time occurrance, it also changes the em field
>density. This may explain racing sparks along the secondary at low power
>high power levels and why changing the secondary vertical positioning can
>or minimize this condition and produce sometimes longer, sometimes shorter arc
>Until a program can take into account the em field parameters (sparkgap
>current/time, etc..), coupling is a hit and miss condition. With a system
>to just beyond the Pri to Sec arc distance, raising the secondary *can*
>better *coupling*, it may also reduce coupling depending on the em fields
>relationship to the secondary.
>At some point in our TC technology, we must begin research to best shape the em
>field. This is where programs such as SPICE will play a large roll.
>Sorry to respond so late to your first post. My life got real busy here
>I did review all the other posts.
>Tesla List wrote:
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> Date: Mon, 13 Jul 1998 05:27:53 +0000
>> From: "John H. Couture" <couturejh-at-worldnet.att-dot-net>
>> To: Tesla List <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>
>> Subject: Re: How to rise the secondary? (fwd)
>> Barton, All -
>> Coupling is not a critical adjustment for Tesla coils and exact coupling
>> is not necessary. In fact, when the secondary is raised if only the
>> coupling changed the only change would be a reduction in the TC output. The
>> reason the output does change is because the tuning changes and this is very
>> important and must be precisely set to obtain maximum output from the TC.
>> The problem with raising the sec to prevent sparking and change the tuning
>> is that there is a better way to design and build Tesla coils. When a TC is
>> correctly designed, built, and tuned, raising the sec will only reduce the
>> output until it is zero. A correctly designed TC requires that the pri to
>> sec clearance be adequate to prevent sparkovers. This is not a critical
>> parameter because classical Tesla coils operate over a wide range of
>> couplings from about 0.10 for large coils to about 0.30 for small coils.
>> If an exact coupling is desired it cannot be done by raising the sec because
>> chances are the tuning will not be correct. This is not true when the
>> primary is used to tune the coil.
>> Coupling or K factor is only a numerical ratio like pi. With Tesla coils
>> the coupling is a ratio of inductances. Changing the coupling changes the
>> inductances which changes the tuning when raising the sec. This does not
>> happen when the tuning is changed by changing the primary coil. Quenching is
>> not changed by coupling but it may be changed by tuning and other
>> It is important to know that raising the sec can be used to "tweak the
>> tuning" but there is a better way. That is to design the primary with
>> sufficient clearance to prevent sparkovers instead of having to raise the
>> sec. The necessary clearance data has been obtained by empirical means by
>> many coilers in the past. I have incorporated this data into the JHCTES TC
>> computer program and it appears to be working. The data can only be verified
>> when other coilers make similar programs for comparison.
>> John Couture