[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

*To*: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com*Subject*: RE: New formula for secondary resonant frequency*From*: "Tesla list" <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>*Date*: Sat, 03 Feb 2001 21:00:03 -0700*Resent-Date*: Sat, 3 Feb 2001 21:12:38 -0700*Resent-From*: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com*Resent-Message-ID*: <5Nep9C.A.DGC.waNf6-at-poodle>*Resent-Sender*: tesla-request-at-pupman-dot-com

Original poster: "John H. Couture by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-uswest-dot-net>" <couturejh-at-worldnet.att-dot-net> Kurt - What are you using for the Medhurst equation? John Couture --------------------------- -----Original Message----- From: Tesla list [mailto:tesla-at-pupman-dot-com] Sent: Saturday, February 03, 2001 9:06 AM To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com Subject: Re: New formula for secondary resonant frequency Original poster: "Kurt Schraner by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-uswest-dot-net>" <k.schraner-at-datacomm.ch> ------------------------snip ing of the equation coefficients in the last digits. As a next, 4 of my own coils are compared: Coil Sk B&W Sk Long Coil Sk 12cm Coil Sk 20cm Coil turns 821 1950 921 979 h 1.768 1.41 0.585 0.68 d 0.4013 0.1633 0.1207 0.2 b 0.7 0.5 0.2 0.5 awg 17.162 22.053 22 22 Fres,cal 131.4 157.3 409.0 209.3 Paul's formula Fres,exp 119 147.7 368 202.7 Diff 10.4% 6.5% 11.2% 3.2% cal-exp Fres,cal 123.1 139.6 372.9 200.0 Wheeler/Medhurst Diff 3.4% -5.5% 1.3% -1.3% cal-exp It seems, my coils are yet more happy with Wheeler/Medhurst, however the precision of the experimental data have to be considered. Regarding the instruments, I believe to be quite precise (specifics can be supplied). The most of error probably stems from the spacial situation, present, when measuring the coils: capacitive influence of the surroundings! The B&W coil, i.e., was tested in my living room, which is one floor above ground level, and the top of my big coil only ~0.4m from the ceiling. BTW: Would you have perhaps at hand, a version of your function = -94.6683*awg*awg*awg + 9000.55*awg*awg - 301175*awg + 3.64056e+6 beeing currently a function of awg, made a function of wire diameter instead, like f(wd[m])? Measured values of wire diameter could more easyly be introduced that way. Hope,the tables will arrive in a well readable condition! Greets Kurt Schraner ----------------------snip - > Paul Nicholson, > Manchester, UK. > --

- Prev by Date:
**PT CURRENT LIMITING QUESTION!** - Next by Date:
**Re: New formula for secondary resonant frequency** - Prev by thread:
**Re: New formula for secondary resonant frequency** - Next by thread:
**Re: New formula for secondary resonant frequency** - Index(es):