Re: spun toroids

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

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

In a message dated 6/2/01 12:54:45 PM Eastern Daylight Time, tesla-at-pupman-dot-com 
writes:

> Original poster: "Barton B. Anderson by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-qwest.
> net>" <tesla123-at-pacbell-dot-net>
>  
>  David,
>  
>  I'd be interested as well. Also, I agree with Charles to reduce wieght as
>  much as possible. This may
>  also reduce the costs per unit? If we are all looking at "about" the same
>  size toroids, it may also
>  help reduce costs if we centered on one size. Any thoughts?
>  
>  Bart Anderson

Bart, all,

I like the idea of a light-weight large toroid too.  The Langegran 
toroid was 0.125" thick I think.  Somehow I suspect that if one
of them was dropped on the ground, it would get dented, even
using 6061, but I may be wrong about that.  It seems to me the
greater weight of a thick toroid would cause it to fall with more
momentum, making denting likely anyway although I'm not sure
if it works quite that way.  My 4" by 13" toroids were 0.041" thick,
and they get dented if they're dropped.  I've found however that
my small 6" toroids can survive a drop, at least onto a wooden
floor.  Much probably depends on how it lands.  It may be possible to
use 0.080" thick 6061 for a 8" x 30" toroid or something like that,
which should hold down the weight and cost.  I suppose 0.063" 
material would be rather thin for that size.  I certainly agree that
only one size should be ordered for a bulk buy, although if a 
great number of two different sizes were ordered, that could 
work out also.  It's too bad a toroid can't be folded up and stored
in a shoebox    :)    

Speaking about toroid dimensions, I wouldn't
be surprised if it's a good idea to make the minor diameter large
relative to the major diameter.  For instance a 10" by 30" toroid
may be preferable to a 8" by 30" toroid.  A 12" by 30" toroid may
be even better.  Such a "fat" toroid would hold off large voltages,
to handle a lot of power, yet, the toroid would not fill the Tesla
lab as much.  I don't think very many experiments have been
done to analyze the relative benefits of a fat toroid vs. a thinner
aspect ratio.  I sort of like the look of fat toroids, I think the
fatness makes them look powerful   :)   It is possible that the
common aspect ratio of 1:4 or 1:3 is not aggressive enough.  
Maybe 1:2.5 is better.  But there's a counter arguement.... 
because a large overall diameter toroid is better for aiming the
sparks outward, away from the primary and secondary.  The
aspect ratio is not something that has been discussed much.
What are folks views on this?    Details, details......

Cheers,
John Freau

>  
>  Tesla list wrote:
>  
>  > Original poster: "Charles Brush by way of Terry Fritz
>  <twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>" <cfbrush-at-interport-dot-net>
>  >
>  > >
>  > >>I was just wondering if there may be enough piggie coilers  out there
>  > >>that would be interested in a bulk buy of larger  toroids like say 8"
>  > >>X 32". The 6"X 24" ones looked great  form the pics, but these just
>  > >>wouldn't be quite big enough  for my 10 kVA pig system. I know the
>  > >>cost would be prohi-  bitive for single orders, but may become
>  > >>somewhat more  affordable if enough people were interested. If we
>  > >>could get  them for < $250 each, that would be a definite plus :-)
>  > >
>  > >>Sparkin' in Memphis,
>  > >  >David Rieben
>  >
>  > I would be interested in one as well.  Weight is definitely a
>  > consideration though.  The ones from the last group order were
>  > gorgeous but very heavy for their size.  A slightly thinner wall
>  > might work well in the 6061-0  aluminum.  That is if enough people
>  > are interested.
>  >
>  > Zap!
>  >
>  > Charles Brush
>