[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Voltage/Length (fwd)
----------
From: Malcolm Watts [SMTP:MALCOLM-at-directorate.wnp.ac.nz]
Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 1998 2:36 PM
To: Tesla List
Subject: Re: Voltage/Length (fwd)
A comment:
> From: John H. Couture [SMTP:couturejh-at-worldnet.att-dot-net]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 1998 2:17 AM
> To: Tesla List
> Subject: Re: Voltage/Length (fwd)
>
> At 09:01 AM 1/27/98 -0600, you wrote:
> >
> >----------
> >From: Bert Hickman [SMTP:bert.hickman-at-aquila-dot-com]
> >Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 1998 9:12 AM
> >To: Tesla List
> >Subject: Re: Voltage/Length (fwd)
> >
> >Tesla List wrote:
> >>
> >> ----------
> >> From: John H. Couture [SMTP:couturejh-at-worldnet.att-dot-net]
> >> Sent: Monday, January 26, 1998 6:19 PM
> >> To: Tesla List
> >> Subject: Re: Voltage/Length (fwd)
> >>
> >> Antonio -
> >>
> >> How do you do the calcs for finding the secondary voltage per Greg Leyh's
> >> problem with 3 MV and 100 pf? Do you use this equation?
>
> ----------------------------------- big snip
> >
> >John and all,
> >
> >
> > Vs(max) = F*Vgap*sqrt(Cp/Cs) where 0.5 < F < 0.9 typically
> >
> >Now, if I have 1 bang/second or 400 bangs/second, the above equation
> >does not change! Vs does not increase with increasing input power levels
> >(although sparklength may for other reasons). Cs may increase a bit in
> >the latter case because of additonal ion-cloud loading. Also, the above
> >equation is only appropriate if I don't have loading from secondary
> >breakout.
>
> >---------------------------------- big snip-
>
> p current is highest. John, something appears to be amiss somewhere in
> >the model you're using, or in the set of assumptions used for your
> >model.
> >
> >Safe coilin' to you!
> >
> >-- Bert --
> >
> --------------------------------------------
>
> Bert -
>
> I agree the above equation does not change when bangs change. But what is
> your point in bringing in bangs? The above equation does not include joules
> (energy) or watts (power). However, the bangs determine the joules or watts.
>
> Joules (watt seconds) = .5 Cp Vp Bangs/eff
>
> It is obvious from the above equation that when bangs change the Joules
> will change. If the joules are not changed the charge on the capacitor will
> change and this is another type of problem.
>
> Note that energy and power transfer between the pri and sec circuits is
> always 100 percent (Skilling). This is easily understood. The transfer is by
> induction and there are no losses in inductive reactance. Also, there are no
> equations for losses in inductive or capacitive reactances. The coil
> resistance losses and the capacitor dissipation losses are all Ohms law (not
> reactive) losses.
>
> The model I am using is correct but may not be accurate because
> assumptions were made.
That statement is clearly an oxymoron (nee - a contradiction in
terms)!
Malcolm
> For someone to say these assumptions are incorrect
> requires that they collect test data from several dozen coils and do the
> necessary calculations and graphs as I have done. This would make it
> possible to show where the assumptions should be changed. I am hoping that
> someone will do this so we can compare results.
>
> John Couture
>
>
>