Re: New 4" coil: R.Hull and CSN, Secondary Varnish

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

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

Dave,

There is no doubt that newer LTR methods give longer sparks,
along with good NST protection compared to the old methods.

Generally today's view (which I agree with), is that a thick
secondary insulation does not cause noticeable losses, and
can prevent secondary damage in case minor racing sparks
occur.

I think the best "efficiency" occurs with larger caps, which
permit low breakrates using typical voltages.  However if a 
very high voltage is used,
then smaller caps can be used, since the bang size will still
be large.  R. Hull advocated the use of higher voltages of
around 20kV or so, and I agree with this approach.  It would
appear to me that a low break rate and large bang size is
the real key to building an "efficient" coil.  This all depends
on spark growth characteristics in air, which are still being
studied.

I've seen no efficiency benefit from magnifier systems 
compared to normal classic coils.  The magnifiers may
offer a theorical benefit if built to Antonio's specs, but this
has not been demonstrated in a sparking coil.  

John