Re: Capping secondary coil forms

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

Original poster: "Daniel Barrett by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>" <dbarrett1-at-austin.rr-dot-com>

     My output does not vastly exceed the coil length, but I have never seen
an arc that wants to be anywhere near the centerline of the coil- they seem
to like to go someplace far away from the coil. I'm sure that if you create
a 2 inch tall coil that produces 35 foot arcs that logic falls down, but my
coil would much rather jump 6 feet off the side of the torroid than 4 feet
down the open center-
db

----- Original Message -----
From: "Tesla list" <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>
To: <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>
Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2002 2:00 PM
Subject: Capping secondary coil forms


 > Original poster: "Gregory Peters by way of Terry Fritz
<twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>" <s371034-at-student.uq.edu.au>
 >
 > Hello all,
 >
 > All these years I have been capping my secondary forms with
 > plexiglas/acyrlic or lexan/polycarbonate discs. This apparently
 > prevents arcs down the centre of the secondary. I have never
 > questioned this theory until now. I just made a new secondary and
 > really couldn't be bothered capping it, though I eventually did
 > anyway. But I really think that if the toroid is large enough, arcing
 > inside the form wouldn't happen anyway. I've noticed that arcs never
 > seem to leave the centre of the toroid, supporting my theory. Is this
 > just another theory that stems from the days of doorknob discharge
 > terminals? Anyone out there running uncapped coils with outputs that
 > vastly exceed the winding length?
 >
 > Cheers,
 >
 > Greg.
 >
 >