[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Measuring secondary voltage (fwd)


----------
From:  Malcolm Watts [SMTP:MALCOLM-at-directorate.wnp.ac.nz]
Sent:  Sunday, January 25, 1998 3:28 PM
To:  Tesla List
Subject:  Re: Measuring secondary voltage (fwd)

Richard, all,
                Perhaps my post was not as complete as it should have 
been....

> From:  richard hull [SMTP:rhull-at-richmond.infi-dot-net]
> Sent:  Thursday, January 22, 1998 8:47 PM
> To:  Tesla List
> Subject:  Re: Measuring secondary voltage (fwd)
> 
> 
> Big snipola
> 
> 
> >I think the last system that one should attempt to extract an 
> >accurate figure from is a small one. IMHO, a large system (one with a 
> >large Cself) running at much reduced Ep to bring it into the measuring 
> >range of test equipment would be the best option. For one thing, 
> >large Cself minimizes the influence of divider probes and the like. 
> >Is there any reason why the result could not be extrapolated to 
> >high values of Ep if an accurate measurement at low Ep could be made?
> >
> >?
> >Malcolm
> >
> >
> >If there is a chance in hell of finding out the straight dope, it will be
> as Malcolm notes above.  Large system, Large Cself or Cterm depending on
> which angle you approach this from.  
> 
> I must differ however on the extrapolation.  Larger Ep means more spark or
> if not issuing, more effective air load via ionization.  I have noted this
> with electrostatic voltmeter measurements.  No spark, but more sauce mean
> more volts in air at a given range.  This translatess into more work done
> and increased load over an increasing cubic area.  It all hurts my brain!
> 
> Richard Hull, TCBOR

    Firstly, in extrapolating I am first assuming a measurement 
without spark at the lower power level. Secondly, climbing primary 
losses must be taken into account as primary energy is upped - but 
this loss is quite measureable. The point is knowing exactly how much 
energy resides in the secondary at the first null. Finally, the value 
at high power must of course be a theoretical one because sparks are 
obviously going to issue. I am basically arguing for a theoretical 
limit on Vout under no breakout conditions. It can certainly be 
argued that this is a pie in the sky ideal. Perhaps it doesn't 
actually matter. The goal is to determine an accurate figure for Vout 
*at any level*, the object being to find which model most accurately 
describes the resonator and settles the various claims one way or the 
other (well that is my goal anyway). Until this is done, various 
models of the resonator are going to be debated endlessly without 
resolution.

Regards,
Malcolm