Re: All pain no gain

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

Original poster: "Terry Fritz" <twftesla-at-uswest-dot-net>

Hi Ed and All,

All the programs do use the same formulas and do give pretty much identical
results.  However, the trick is the secondary toroid/system capacitance.
There is no easy formula to come up with that number so the program use
various methods of guessing and that is where the numbers vary greatly.

E-Tesla6 can find the secondary system frequency accurately and then the
rest is easy.  Unfortunately, no programs I know of use that method "yet"
(hint, hint :-))

E-Tesla6 and it's internal algorithms are free and public domain so there
is no reason not to use it's guts in a more general program...

http://hot-streamer-dot-com/TeslaCoils/Programs/E-Tesla6.zip

The simple C source code and all is included in the above.  It will run
under practically any C compiler Hint, hint....

Cheers,

	Terry


At 03:28 PM 3/9/2001 -0500, you wrote:
>In a message dated 3/8/01 9:48:38 PM Pacific Standard Time, tesla-at-pupman-dot-com 
>writes:
>
><< 
> I'm curious. Do you have a bit more dimensional info on your primary?
> JavaTC, JHCTES, Ed Sonderman's
> Spreadsheet, WinTesla, etc.. are all very close to one another. For the
> most part, we all use the same calc's,
> however, there are a few calcs we go about differently for different
> reasons. I suspect there are dimensions
> which are off one way or another due to the degree the tap point you
> indicated is off. JavaTC shows about 18
> turns if I use similar inputs to Johns. But, everyone is kind of guessing
> at a few unknown dimensions. If the
> program is that far off I'd like to find out why. Others have used it with
> excellent results at first light.
> Yours is the first case I've heard otherwise which is partially why I'm
> interested in your input dimensions vs.
> your actual measurements.
> 
> For TPI, simply count the turns in an inch and verify this at different
> points (this isn't exact, but it's as
> close as you'll get without counting the entire coil - as I once did). This
> helps fine tune the secondary which
> of course affects the resonant frequency and thus primary calcs. I would
> also back up John about measuring the
> cap and verifying all dimensions. They do make a difference regardless of
> which program you use. I personally
> like to use them all.
> 
> Keep us posted.
> 
> Take care,
> Bart A.
>  >>
>Bart,
>
>The idea of different programs producing different numbers is expected I 
>guess.  It would be nice if we could rely on the programs to produce 
>consistent results, within a few percent anyway.  I will supply the data on 
>my smaller coil here and maybe others could run it on their programs and 
>report back.  In this situation, I am solving for the primary tap point.
>Secondary: 3.0" O.D.  closewound,  winding length 13.1", #28 wire, using 72.7 
>turns per inch
>Toroid capacitance" 18 pf
>Primary:  5.8" I.D., diameter of wire .10", spacing between turns .35" (not 
>center to center - but actual clearance), flat spiral 
>Primary tank capacitor:  .009 ufd
>
>I calculate the proper tap point should be 10.9 turns.
>
>Ed Sonderman
>