Re: How to rise the secondary? (fwd)
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1998 19:39:26 -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)
I think Antonio has put into words what many coilers have been trying to say. I don't
beleive a software program (emperical based, simulation, etc...) can ever calculate to
the nth degree of precision enough to allow a coiler to completely build to the
calculated design without a tweak here or there. Raising the secondary is just a
tweak, in some cases beneficial, in other cases it's not. Your program may very well
be the nearest to precision, which we should all strive for, but there may still be a
tweak needed here or there. This is always a judgement call. The coilers resolve might
be one that appears to be the right one, but maybe it was just one of many that could
have been done.
Too bad we couldn't all get in one place with our coils for a year and knock out these
suttle differences. Unfortunately, we ALL have lives (but wouldn't it be great!).
"The Great Ozone Battle of 1999". By the year 2000, we would all be ISO Certified!
Tell you what, if I win that $1/4 billion dollar lotto tonight, hmmm... who knows....
Tesla List wrote:
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1998 21:08:36 -0700
> From: "Antonio Carlos M. de Queiroz" <acmq-at-compuland-dot-com.br>
> To: Tesla List <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>
> Subject: Re: How to rise the secondary? (fwd)
> John Couture wrote:
> > Antonio -
> > Do you believe that a raised secondary TC can produce longer sparks
> > compared to a properly designed TC where the secondary does not have to be
> > raised?
> > Please - yes or no.
> No, if the initial design includes careful consideration of one of those
> "magical" coupling coefficients, and the clearance is sufficient to avoid
> primary-secondary sparks.
> The problem is that it is difficult to design a coil with precisely a given
> coupling coefficient, and the optimum coupling coefficients may vary slightly due
> to unpredictable losses associated with the primary gap and streamers in
> the secondary side. Some adjustment in a "properly designed TC", by rising (or
> lowering) the secondary a little, or doing the same with the primary, may result
> in improved output. Not much, but some.
> Did someone try to incline a primary flat coil to adjust the coupling coefficient?
> (looks dangerous...) Or some other method?
> Antonio Carlos M. de Queiroz