[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Conical secondaries
Original poster: "John H. Couture by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-uswest-dot-net>" <couturejh-at-worldnet.att-dot-net>
I haven't seen any test data on flat vs inverted cone primaries and will be
anxious to hear about what you find. It is my understanding that the
advantage, if any, of the inverted cone is that it provides more coupling,
more flux linkages, and more output compared to the flat primary. In other
words the inverted cone gives the advantages of both the flat primary and
the helical coil primary.
Could you test not only the inductances but also the couplings using the
same secondary coil? Testing the outputs would also help but could be very
difficult using a test method with metered inputs and controlled sparks.
From: Tesla list [mailto:tesla-at-pupman-dot-com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2001 7:02 AM
Subject: Re: Conical secondaries
Original poster: "Barton B. Anderson by way of Terry Fritz
Interesting you brought this up. I just bought 100 ft of primary tubing at
Base (btw, going out of business and 50 to 70% off) to wind conical
test against calculated inductances via Fr measurements. Conical primary's
cone's (I know, duh). The only problem with a conical primary is that the
windings are typically higher up on the secondary and therefore have greater
potential to take a strike from the secondary streamers. What if it is wound
downward? The secondary coupling would then need to be checked via current
measurement to see how far down the secondary should actually be to achieve
similar coupling on an upright cone. This is part of my current experiments
Tesla list wrote:
> Original poster: "by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-uswest-dot-net>"
> Does any one know anything about conical secondaries? I'm asuming there
> some point in Tesla making them.