Re: Does it matter which way i wind my secondary?

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

Original poster: "Bert Hickman by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-uswest-dot-net>" <bert.hickman-at-aquila-dot-net>

Tesla list wrote:
> 
> Original poster: "Ed Phillips by way of Terry Fritz
<twftesla-at-uswest-dot-net>" <evp-at-pacbell-dot-net>
> 
> > Really, your argument makes sense, and looking at a paper (1936)
> > describing the big Roud Hill double Van de Graaff generator I see that
> > the maximum voltage was higher at the negative terminal (2.7 MV x
> > 2.4 MV), meaning that breakout was easier at the positive terminal.
<SNIP>
> > > However, I seem to remember some empirical evidence that this was not
> > > necessarily the case during some TC breakout voltage measurements. And,
> > > I also seem to remember that the current measurements taken on Electrum
> > > DID seem to support positive polarity as being preferred, but I'll have
> > > to check back into the archives...
> 
>         Would be interested in seeing what the archives have to say!
> 
<SNIP>

Ed, Antonio,

There are some very interesting references that discuss terminal
polarity versus streamer growth. Check out the Pupman Archives for the
"Positive versus Negative Streamer", "Arc Impedance Study", "Simulation
of Streamer Discharges", and "Streamer Capacitance (Was how to rise the
secondary)" discussions from 1998. Measurements made by Terry, Greg
Leyh, and various references from published literature all seem to
support the preference for streamer initiation with positive terminal
polarity vs negative.  

-- Bert --
-- 
Bert Hickman
Stoneridge Engineering
Email:    bert.hickman-at-aquila-dot-net
Web Site: http://www.teslamania-dot-com