Re: Retuning with bigger cap?

To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
Subject: Re: Retuning with bigger cap?
From: "Barton B. Anderson" <mopar-at-uswest-dot-net> (by way of Terry Fritz <terryf-at-verinet-dot-com>)
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1998 20:01:39 -0700
Approved: terryf-at-verinet-dot-com

Sam, All,

Tesla List wrote:

> Original Poster: Sam Laur <slaur-at-sekunda.pp.utu.fi>
>
> <snip>But then, it turned out to be unnecessary anyway,
> I talked with Mike Hammer on IRC about it; he pointed me to WinTesla, and
> it turned out that the resonant frequency wasn't what the Javascript
> Tesla Coil Calculator said (about 180 kHz) - but more like 320 kHz. With a
> small top load, this seems to match closely the frequency I originally
> measured from the vicinity of the coil.

The Java Calculator only calculates the frequency according to the length
of wire
and does "not" add in Ctop. It's just a stand alone calculation. Reason I'm
replying is a question to the list.

Do you guys use this calculator and if not, should I remove it?  Jerry Gore
wrote
this a couple years ago, but I myself don't use it. The only reason I have
it up
at my web site is I have had a few respond off list that they do use it. My
concern is this. If one does not account for Ctop (as well as other
variables) and
rely's solely on a length of wire calculation, they are going to be surprised
(among other things) that the coil is not near the frequency they were
expecting.
How many of us run without top loads anyway?  I may remove it just because the
Java Calculator is not maintainable by me.  It strongly needs updating and
I have
"not" the expertise in Java to do so.  Dear I hear any votes out there to
"trash
it"? I know most of you could care less, but is anyone interested in
keeping it?
Maybe that's a more appropriate question to how I feel about it.

Bart