[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: Eric Dollard 180 phasing tesla coil
> Original Poster: "Harvey Norris" <tesla4-at-excite-dot-com>
>
> A Michael Randall had once mentioned to me in mailing about the exotic 180
> phased TC system from Borderland Research, perhaps I
> am surely mistaken. In reality nothing about this should be
> exotic the way I understand it. This was before I joined
> the list, so now I am enquiring.Enquiring minds need to know
> in order to grow.
> The fact of certain matters needs to be addressed
> in such a way that when something previously mentioned
> is passed over as being insignificant, it must again be
> mentioned in light of its possible significance.
> The whole design of TC construction is predicated on designs
> already predicated on a single primary.The question and advantage
> of using two primaries from two oppositely phased 180 degree systems
> placed so the primaries are in mutual inductance has not been
> addressed as a realistic new parameter of design.
Hi Harvey,
A diagram would help.
> The simple version of this idea is contained in the Oudin coil
> typically represented with a primary in the middle and a Half wave-
> length total of wire length which essentially must be the same thing
> as two quarter wavelength resonators placed back to back.
My advice: forget the 1/n wavelengths of wire thing. Unless you use a
particular terminal capacitance, this condition is never met. I have
taken a 1/4 wave resonator, placed a primary around the middle and
found that the resonant frequency does not double as one might think.
Can't remember whether it was higher or lower (long time ago).
> Then the determined polarity of both end terminals is supposedly
> exercized to be most effectively opposite to each other and
> conducive to arcing between them.
> Again in comparison we could place two ordinary1/4 wavelength
> resonators back to back to secure the same effect: but then there
> would be TWO primaries and not ONE. Each of the capacities in turn
> associated with those primaries would have to be readjusted according
> to the change made by MUTUAL inductance between those primaries.
> As we draw these two imaginary schematics out in our minds we see
> two of these well recognized schematics; that of two tesla primaries
> where a distinction has been made whereby the primaries are placed
> in constructive mutual agreement in induction; irrespective of the fact
> that they were 180 phased and the coils were arranged to aid and not
> oppose. On each of the schematics one will see its appropriate arc gap
> that initiates the high freq. tank oscillation.
> In reality those two different arc gaps in the double schematic can
> be replaced by a new schematic where each side uses the SAME
> arc gap in OPPOSITE directions. This is a total redesign of things.
It sounds fundamentally the same to me.
> I therefore submit that a stagnation of knowlege over time of tesla
> coil design has possibly occured and some relevant explanations can
>
> or cannot be made in defence of the status quo?
> Sincere in the truth;
> Harvey D Norris
> parallel configuration reconfigured,
> recognized and refined for modern times...
I submit that nothing has stagnated. To the contrary, a lot of
thought has gone into TC theory and construction and a raft of new
instrumentation has been used to probe the goings-on. Results:
physically small coils throwing long sparks, the use of large
terminal capacitances (emulates the pool of charge available in
lightning to an extent), formulae for designing a TC for a particular
frequency (within a few percent) without resorting to dodgy concepts
such as wire length, determination of output voltage, designing a
secondary to withstand a particular output voltage etc. I don't think
Borderland has come up with anything new.
Malcolm