Re: Coil ratio; width versus length.

["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 4/9/02 3:55:10 AM Eastern Daylight Time, tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
writes:

Hi Bart,

Yes, the high bps coil may have greater gap losses.  The
concept of using many series electrodes, to force better quenching,
may be a good idea, although I haven't seen any advantage when
I tried it in a rotary gap.  My designs may primarily help 
performance by reducing losses, although there may be other
factors at work also.  

Cheers,
John


>
> Hi John,
>
> High L/P ratio sounds good to me. However, I would guess high bps coils
> would not
> be as low of losses as they could be. Granted, sparks may be whiter as their
> pushing watts through the system, but I would wonder if the high repitition
> of gap
> action would cause considerable loss when it comes down to wall plug power
> and
> sparklength. It would probably require quite a few electrodes to keep the
> losses
> down, and even then, I'd bet on the low bps coils to win out in the gap
> loss arena,
> thus greatly affecting the overall.
>
> Take care,
> Bart
>
> Tesla list wrote:
>
> > Original poster: "by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>"
> <FutureT-at-aol-dot-com>
> >
> > In a message dated 4/8/02 3:57:45 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
> tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
> > writes:
> >
> > Bart,
> >
> > The problem with calling it a low loss system is it does not consider
> > the growth of sparks in the air.  Higher bps may make the sparks
> > brighter rather than longer to some extent, so this is not necessarily
> > a loss, since some folks may prefer the brighter sparks.  What I'm
> > saying is that some aspects of my designs may reduce losses, but
> > other aspects may increase the spark length in ways that do not
> > directly involve lowered losses.
> >
> > Hmmmm.  I'm thinking of a new term here....  something like a
> > "high spark length to input power ratio" or a "high L/P ratio" design.
> > Or perhaps a high "SL/IP" design.  My equations would then be
> > viewed as predicting the performance of high L/P ratio designs,
> > or high spark length to power input design.  This terminology
> > seems a little cumbersome though.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > John
> >
> > >
> > > Agree. I've never liked even using the word "efficiency" because of the
> many
> > > discussions in the past on the subject and the many different points of
> > > reference
> > > to it. But I think we can call it a "low-loss" design. This term should
> be
> > > easily
> > > understood that it refers to the entire system from start to finish, not
> > > just one
> > > part of the coil. With this in mind, a "low-loss" design will maximize
> the
> > > output
> > > for whatever that potential is on each coil.
> > >
> > > Your equations can be viewed as predicted sparklengths for power input
> based
> > > on
> > > low-loss systems.
> > >
> > > Take care,
> > > Bart
> > >
> > >
>
>