Re: EM only coil?

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

Original poster: "c d by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>" <vbprg1-at-hotmail-dot-com>

I have been traveling along the same lines
neon lit at a distance for art, and other madness. :)

Thanks for confirming what I was thinking
about the oversized torid. Also this has led me to
believe that I have not found the correct tuning point
on my new primary. We got a flouresent to light up about
12 feet away from the new setup. While on the old setup
I couldnt get it to light more than 3 feet away, but I took
a long time tuning that one and it was in an inch or so of
right spot.

Glad I read this message.
Thanks again
Chris


>Hi Josh,
> > I want to construct a tesla coil that is not about sparks but about EM
>field.
>
>Strictly speaking, the secondary of a TC isn't need if all you want to do is
>create an E-field and B-field, the discharges into the primary do that,
>which causes the induced voltage in the secondary in a conventional TC.
>However, if you remove the secondary, most of the energy stays in the
>primary circuit, and can damage components such as overvoltage on the NST
>and/or cap(s).  You would have to seriously derate the ratings of the cap,
>by how much I don't know, I'm sure you'll get many more responses.
>The reason more energy is radiated in the form of a field when the coil is
>out of tune is that the secondary is not absorbing all the energy and
>creating sparks, but the same energy is being put into the tank circuit.
>The same thing will occur for a TC system with an oversized toroid/too low
>input power.  There will be no breakout, and the energy will be radiated by
>the E-field/B-field.
>Hope that helps some, sorry if it didn't make a lot of sense, I just got
>done taking the GRE about an hour ago, so my thoughts aren't exactly
>entirely coherent right now :-)
>
>Sean Taylor