Re: Single vs Twin TCs

["Tesla list" <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>]

Original poster: "rheidlebaugh by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>" <rheidlebaugh-at-zialink-dot-com>

I have a thought that dosent follow the 1.414 / .707 rule because the spark
length is not an effectine power ratio problem. The total charge is the
charge on the toroid by accumulation of static build up of several pulses to
the point of air breakdown. The single coil absorbes part of the charge into
the ground. A double coil would tend to charge the second end with the
energy lost in the ground.Just a random thought based on 1/4 vs 1/2 wave
length antenna efficency.
   Robert  H

> From: "Tesla list" <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>
> Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 22:31:47 -0700
> To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
> Subject: Re: Single vs Twin TCs
> Resent-From: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
> Resent-Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 22:45:30 -0700
> 
> Original poster: "Barton B. Anderson by way of Terry Fritz
> <twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>" <tesla123-at-pacbell-dot-net>
> 
> Hi Steve -
> 
> I've pasted a post from Bert Hickman which should be interesting to you
> (it's at the bottom).
> 
> Take care,
> Bart
> 
> Tesla list wrote:
> 
>> Original poster: "S & J Young by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>"
> <youngs-at-konnections-dot-net>
>> 
>> Hi list,
>> 
>> A twin TC is alleged to be more efficient than a single TC.  That is, for
>> the same power, a twin allegedly can develop a longer streamer between the
>> toroids than a single coil can to the air or ground.  Can someone explain
>> exactly why?  Is it more than the idea that two smaller diameter primaries
>> might transfer energy more efficiently to the secondaries than one larger
>> primary to one secondary?  I suspect the explanation is more related to what
>> is going on in the air between the toroids.  Your thoughts?
>> 
>> --Steve
> 
> These are some very interesting observations! I'd propose the following
> reasons:
> Leaders (the bright, hot spark channels) are actually being fed
> displacement current by multitudes of dimmer, bright blue colored
> streamers. These diffusely glowing "cold" streamers extend far beyond the
> tips of the brighter leaders, and they are constantly conveying charge
> between the high fields at the tips of the leaders and the surrounding
> regions of lower potential. However, streamer formation and conduction is
> highly dependent on the local E-fields "seen" at the very tips of the
> leaders, and these fields are a function of the distribution of charges
> in
> the nearby air. In a bipolar system it's very likely that the presence of
> local space charges from the streamer tips of one resonator "feed"
> significantly more current into the streamer tips of the opposite
> resonator
> since they are of opposite polarity. The resulting local E-fields seen at
> the streamer tips are significantly greater and the degree of charge
> transfer via cold streamer discharges between the two is greatly
> enhanced.
> 
> The combination of stronger E-fields at leader tips, and greater
> streamer-to-treamer charge transfer between resonators in a bipolar
> system
> should result in enhanced streamer and leader propagation as compared to
> an
> isolated resonator where leader tips only "see" a far-end potential of
> ground. Enhanced avalanche breakdown, higher streamer currents, and
> longer
> leaders should result when the resonators are located close enough so
> that
> they favorably impact each other's E-fields at leader tips. Since the
> dimmer streamer "glow" extends considerably past the tips of the leaders
> and these streamers provide displacement current flow to support the
> leaders, anything which benefits streamer growth or increases streamer
> current will also tend to enhance leader growth and maintenance. This
> improvement should be observed even when the resonators are far enough
> apart so that the leaders are prevented from connecting. If we move the
> resonators far enough apart, the leader length of each resonator would
> decrease to that of an isolated resonator that's driven at HALF the total
> input power.
> 
> A further REDUCTION in leader length should be observed if the resonators
> are driven with the SAME phasing since E-fields at the leader tips of one
> resonator are reduced by the presence of the other resonator. A streamer
> trying to grow towards the opposing resonator would, in effect, be trying
> to "swim upstream" from an E-field standpoint. Because streamer growth
> and
> current flow are considerably reduced, so are the leaders that head
> between
> the two resonators. Leader length between two similarly phased resonators
> is thus considerably shorter than it would otherwise be with a
> stand-alone
> resonator.
> 
> Sort of makes sense, doesn't it?
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> -- Bert --
> --
> Bert Hickman
> Stoneridge Engineering
> Email:    bert.hickman-at-aquila-dot-net
> Web Site: http://www.teslamania-dot-com
> 
> 
> 
>