[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Original poster: "davep by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>" <davep-at-quik-dot-com>
Tesla list wrote:
> Original poster: "Malcolm Watts by way of Terry Fritz
> Hi Dave,
> On 14 May 01, at 21:49, Tesla list wrote:
> > Original poster: "davep by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-uswest-dot-net>"
> > <davep-at-quik-dot-com>
> > Tesla list wrote:
> > > Original poster: "Malcolm Watts by way of Terry Fritz
> > <twftesla-at-uswest-dot-net>" <m.j.watts-at-massey.ac.nz>
> > > Hi Bob,
> > > On 14 May 01, at 11:21, Tesla list wrote:
> > > > Original poster: "SIMMS, F R. (JSC-EV4) (LM) by way of Terry Fritz
> > > > <twftesla-at-uswest-dot-net>" <f.r.simms1-at-jsc.nasa.gov>
> > > > If you look at Tesla's coils he used very few turns of heavy gauge
> > > > wire. The reasons he use so few turns is that the voltage goes up
> > > > by the Q and not the turns!!!! The lower the resistance the
> > > > higher the Q and hence the higher the Voltage. I found this out
> > > > trough my friend Jay Reed who found the highest tuning for a Tesla
> > > > coil with mathmatics. The math was varified in the lab. His coil
> > > > had the exact voltage and waveform his math predicted.
> > > I presume he was testing using a CW source?
> > It's a fair description of Tesla's Colorado Springs coil.
> > I'd call that a more or less classic Spark excited system.
> The few turns of thick wire in all coils?
I mentioned Colorado Springs, specifically. Over the years Tesla
tried many coils.
> Was that really the most efficient system that could be built?
I've no idea. It was, it seems the best that could be built
by the best practitioner of the time, with (more or less)
unlimited money. I don't necessarily view at it as The Best,
I believe 'we' know more now. I DO believe, that careful
observations of the trend of the coils built may still
yield some points of interest.
> Hands up all those who believe Tesla hit 10MV. Are you suggesting that
> were that coil to be lossless (i.e. Q being infinite) the output
> voltage would have been infinite too?
I believe it would TEND towards infinity. Any number of
factors will limit the rise along the way. (Corona loss,
for one...). In any case my beliefs are more or less
irrelevant, compared to a good experiment...
> > (I've disrecalled what was used at Wardenclyffe?)
> Not sure. I think for his transmission system he would have been
> aiming for as close to CW as he could get.
Vaguely concur from what informed speculation I've seen.
There were a variety of approaches to quasi CW in the spark
radio technology. These can be instructive, I think, whether
Tesla was doing 'something else' or radio.