Re: Homemade chokes

["Malcolm Watts" <M.J.Watts-at-massey.ac.nz> (by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-uswest-dot-net>)]

Hi Bill,

On 10 Aug 00, at 23:23, Tesla list wrote:

> Original poster: "Bill Lemieux" <gomez-at-netherworld-dot-com> 
> 
> On that fateful day 8/10/00 6:23 PM, thus spake Tesla list:
> 
> Original poster: "Malcolm Watts" <M.J.Watts-at-massey.ac.nz>
> 
> > It is a fallacy. Primary Q varies with primary voltage
> 
>  This must be a new and different definition of Q which people have been
> tossing about lately.  The last time I checked, Q was defined (in my
> electronics texts at least) as the inductance (or capacitance in a cap)
> divided by the resistance!
> 
>  How will either of those qualities vary with changes in voltage?

They certainly do when the primary includes a sparkgap which 
is the norm for a disruptive coil. I worked all this out in a 
paper several years ago. It should be in the archives 
somewhere under the heading "PrimaryQ - A Brain Teaser".
The essence of it is that the gap cannot be modelled as a pure 
resistance because if you include it in series with a tuned 
circuit, the result is not a logarithmic decrement but a 
linear one. You can actually see the linear envelope impressed 
on the secondary e-field as pri-sec energy exchanges proceed 
if you prevent the coil from breaking out.

Regards,
Malcolm