Re: New, corrected, Sweet (and sour) spot tests, etc.

To: tesla-at-PUPMAN-dot-com
Subject: Re: New, corrected, Sweet (and sour) spot tests, etc.
From: "Malcolm Watts" <malcolm.watts-at-wnp.ac.nz> (by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-uswest-dot-net>)
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 1999 23:42:51 -0600
Approved: twftesla-at-uswest-dot-net
Delivered-To: fixup-tesla-at-pupman-dot-com-at-fixme

Hi John,
        Thanks for all the effort you have put into these tests:

> Original Poster: FutureT-at-aol-dot-com 

<snip>
>  New tests:
> 
>  In these tests, I ran the TC at various power levels, and with four
>  different toroid sizes, to see how far the spark length would vary
>  from the square law predicted lengths.  Spark length shortfalls from
>  predicted lengths might mean that the coil is becoming inefficient in
>  some cases.
>  
>  All tests at 120 bps.  42" is a reference max spark length.  (This 
>  table can be more easily analyzed if it's printed out on paper, so
>  the headings don't scroll out of view as you scroll down.)
>   
>                                    pri   predicted
>  Watts    cap W  Top"   tap    length       length actual    shortfall%
>    280       210     3x10   18       29"               27"                 7
>    280       210     4x13   19       29                27                  7
>      (note above: the smooth toroid size no longer mattered)
>    400       318     4x13    20      35                 35                 0
>    530       440     4x13    21      42                 42                 0
>    620       498     4x13    21      44.5              45                  0
>       (note: now TC efficiency is constant from 35" to 45" spark and
>        with same toroid)
>    280       210     4x17    20       29                24                 13
>    400       318     4x17    20       36                34                  
> 5.5
>    530       440     4x17    21       42                40                  5
>       (note above how the 4x17" toroid is now inefficient, it may be
>        emitting corona from its corregated surface.  The smooth spun
>        4x13" toroid seems better despite being smaller.)
> 
>   Here's a re-test of the test of Malcolm's suggestion of using a large
>   toroid to hold the voltage constant when increasing the power to see
>   if the spark gets longer:
>   
>   280      210       3x10"    18     29                 27                7
>   560      440       6x26"    26     42                 38                10 
>   These results show that by doubling the power input, and using
>   a rather large toroid to attempt to keep the output voltage constant,
>   the sparks still increased by 41%, even more than in the original
>   test.  This suggests that streamer current is very important too
>   for creating long sparks.  The sparks were very hot and strong 
>   using this large toroid, BTW. 

I got a bit of a fright when I put a much larger terminal onto my 
work coil and simply added another turn into the primary to maintain 
tune. First the coil reached straight for the lathe with some hot 
white bolts that were *loud*, then snaked down towards my feet at 
another switchon. For reasons I still haven't fathomed, I never did 
get the gap to fire properly with this combination but a new sync 
rotary I am building should improve matters (to the point where it 
will probably be unsafe to operate in the room where the coil 
currently lives). I liked the results. Thanks again.

Regards,
Malcolm