Re: Tesla Coil Operation - was "Harmonics"

 Scott -

  Am I trolling you (to lure)? I don't think so. Using a mechanical analogy
to show how a Tesla coil works is a matter of how much you want to overlook
in making the comparison. For example the Tesla coil utilizes induction
which can not be simulated mechanically. The confusion over induction and
inductance is similar to the confusion over power and energy.

  The mechanical analogy of the spring/damper/weight for the CRL circuit is
an accurate one. However, this represents only the primary circuit or the
secondary circuit but not both together. The inductance is represented by
the mass of the weight. This system is described by a 2nd order differential
equation which can be easily implemented on a spreadsheet.

  The mechanical analogy of using pendulums to represenr a Tesla coil is not
an accurate one because the pendulums are physically connected while the pri
and sec TC coils are not physically connected to transfer the energy. This
is important because the transfer is affected by the mutual inductance and
coupling. The energy is transferred by induction which was discovered by
Michael Faraday. These systems are described by 4th order differential
equations. The Corums in their TCTUTOR book show a possible 4th order diff
equation for the TC. These are theoretical equations and lack the necessary
real world data to have then represent actual Tesla coils.

  John Couture


At 12:13 PM 1/18/99 -0700, you wrote:
>Original Poster: Scott Stephens <Scott2-at-mediaone-dot-net> 
>At 02:52 AM 1/17/99 -0700, you wrote:
>>Original Poster: "John H. Couture" <COUTUREJH-at-worldnet.att-dot-net> 
>>  Scott, All -
>>  My understanding of a Tesla coil.
>>  The Tesla coil operation has no mechanical or other electrical analogy.
>Are you trolling me? It may be shorter to list the systems that can't be
>approximated by the classic 2nd order differential equations that describe
>the basic coupled resonators of the Tesla Coil. I know one of my text books
>makes direct mechanical analogs between force, mass, spring and dampers, and
>inductance, capacitance and resistance, and charge, describing both with
>differential equations & Laplace transforms.
>The theory is present in (all?) facets of analog engineering; control
>(servo) systems, RF & filters, even lasers. Digital may appear to have
>little in common, but lately I've been considering how linear recursive
>shift registers and FIR/IIR filters are similar to analog computers, delay
>lines and matched filters, cryptography and chaos. But now I'm into
>higher-order functions; in other words, more than 2 coupled resonators and
>modes of vibrating.
>Maybe Cabbot will see the face of chaos in his dual coupled resonator
>system? Since the system is spark excited, and the spark gap is untriggered,
>significantly dependant on plasma & chemical effects, significant random
>jitter, and this can feed back to a possibly resonant charging system,
>things could get real interesting.
>This is why I believe a triggered spark gap could allow long term stable
>operation of a under-engineered resonant charging coil, that without
>trigger-stabilizing, would otherwise self-destruct. Sort of like a cardiac
>pacemaker preventing fibrillation. The spark gap and safety gap lengths
>would be increased for higher-voltage charging, but without high-frequency
>jittery transients assaulting the cheap transformer.
>>No other
>>electrical apparatus can produce ultra high voltages with large amounts of
>>energy. This leaves out tube, solid state, ignition, all pulse type
>>circuits, Van DeGraaff generators, Linear Accelerators, Marx generators,
>Do a web search for "explosive driven flux compression amplifier" and
>"Wakefield Effect"