[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: Retuning with bigger cap?
Hi Bart,
Here's my "yes" vote. The frequency won't come out right
with a wirelength calc even wothout a topload.
Malcolm
> Original Poster: "Barton B. Anderson" <mopar-at-uswest-dot-net>
>
> 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
>
>
>
>
>