Re: NSTs and Cap Charging, more tests

To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
Subject: Re: NSTs and Cap Charging, more tests
From: "Malcolm Watts" <MALCOLM-at-directorate.wnp.ac.nz> (by way of Terry Fritz <twf-at-verinet-dot-com>)
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 1999 11:35:01 -0600
Approved: twf-at-verinet-dot-com

Hi John,
         Thanks for doing all those tests. So, I stand corrected - 
the NST can easily be made to exceed its plate ratings. I guess this 
makes sense if one models it as a perfect transformer with an 
inductance in series. Interesting that the power draw rises as the 
gap is opened. The figures show signs that near unity power 
factor can be obtained without PFCs at some settings and input 
voltages. Also useful to know.

Regards,
Malcolm

> Original Poster: FutureT-at-aol-dot-com 
> 
> In a message dated 99-04-12 05:53:08 EDT, you write:
> 
> << 
> > I also made the same kind of test using the .0147uF larger-than-
> > resonant-sized (LTRS) cap and
> > it never drew more than the NST rated 360 watts at 120 volts input,
> > again, power increased quickly as the input voltage was raised over
> > 120 volts.  Again I'll have to recheck for other phase positions to
> > verify that no positions can draw more than 360 watts at 120 volts
> > input.  But again, i know the spark was never strong at 120 volts
> > input.
>  
> > John Freau >>
> 
> 
> All,
> 
> Adding to my post here, I did some more tests:
> 
> These tests attempt to look at the differences between watts and
> VA inputs with static gaps and NST's.
> 
> Using .0077uF with (15) .008" gaps, I obtained 24" weak sparks. 
> The system drew 380 watts, and 480VA at 120 volts input.  It drew
> 600 watts, and 960VA at 140 volts input.  With wider gaps 0.168"
> total, power went up to 560 watts, and 600VA, at 120 volts input.
> I didn't try wider gap spacings.

<snip>