Re: FW: Re: Tesla Coil Efficiency Test

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

Original poster: "Barton B. Anderson by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>" <tesla123-at-pacbell-dot-net>

Hi John,

I'm not sure that I agree with any of the efficiency thoughts floating
around. My biggest brain block
here are the sheer number of variables. For example looking at watt-sec. If
I increase bps, I increase
my losses during the watt-sec period. Efficiency is dependent on these
types of variables their
interaction. If we were to set parameters to compare by (bps, power,
method, etc..), this still cannot
tell us efficiency outside the window of parameters.

I know I sound pessimistic. I guess I don't realize the usefulness. There
are many coilers who just
love to run at high bps (I'm not one of them). I would guess their losses
are high in comparison over
the watt-sec, but they also switch a lot of power over that same time
period and can take advantage of
streamer and air density relationships. These are all variables that
efficiency tests just can't
recognize.

Efficiency is a very subjective subject, and that in itself is half the
battle. Tesla Coils make
sparks. If we want to design an "efficient" coil as it pertains to spark
length, then we want to
design the greatest spark length for the least amount of input power. That
identifies a comparison of
spark length and input power and will consider all variables involved. If
we want one spark channel or
10, then we need to compare input power to those outputs. I just can't see
any other tests identifying
all the tid-bits, and in the controlled-chaos of coiling, an efficient
design is when experienced
coilers tell their tale and the builder applies the knowledge to their own
set of parameters. Heck, I
would just like to see coilers agree on the what defines effiency.
Typically, spark lengths, but not
always.

Take care,
Bart

Tesla list wrote:

> Original poster: "John H. Couture by way of Terry Fritz
<twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>" <couturejh-at-mgte-dot-com>
>
> Bart -
>
> I was happy to see you getting involved with this discussion because this
> could affect our  TC programs. As I mentioned before finding the TC
> efficiency is a tricky business but not an impossible parameter to find.
> Being able to determine the TC efficiency and using this information to make
> better coils is a challenge for any coiler.
>
> Finding the TC efficiency by using the output spark does present
> difficulties that may be difficult to surmount and that is why I recommend
> using the incandescent lamp method. The lamp method is much easier to use.
> Refer to my post to Dave.
>
> You mention finding the efficiency by the spark method may not agree with
> the lamp method. I agree this can be a problem.  However, more testing is
> required  regardless of what methods are used. I see the problem as one that
> can be solved by enough testing. At present coilers are not making the tests
> because they are too difficult to do. I believe the lamp test is the answer
> because collecting the data is much simpler to accomplish.
>
> It should be noted that a test like the lamp test I propose does not leave
> anything out that would not give a true engineering overall TC efficiency
> which is  energy out/energy in (black box) efficiency. If you or any other
> coiler will do this lamp test with your coils as I describe in my other
> posts you will find this true engineering efficiency. This information  can
> then be used to determine how your coil is doing compared to other coils
> that have been tested in the same manner. There would be no unaccounted for
> factors.
>
> The "spark length for power input" can be used as I show in my post to Paul.
> The watts/ft of spark has already been found by tests of dozens of coils.
> This test can be used to rate your coil. The next test is to rate your coil
> by the lamp test. These two test methods will help to provide the data so
> the two methods can be coordinated. I admit the spark test does not at
> present have  the required consensus from coilers as to how it should be
> done but that may soon be changed.
>
> It will take a while to reach an agreement on how to do the spark test. It
> is obvious there will always be material for the List for many years into
> the future. To answer one of your questions regarding the John F. spark
> length equation or similar equation the coil with the longer spark will have
> the greater efficiency. The testing method is what must be agreed upon. As
> for losses they will all be included in the lamp tests.
>
> We must be working on something unique because apparently no one except this
> List mentions TC efficiency and how to find it. High voltage labs,
> universities, etc, that are involved with Tesla coils don't show how to find
> this important information. Even the commercial Tesla coilers are silent on
> this subject.
>
> John Couture
>
> ------------------------------
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tesla list [mailto:tesla-at-pupman-dot-com]
> Sent: Saturday, June 29, 2002 11:59 AM
> To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
> Subject: Re: FW: Re: Tesla Coil Efficiency Test
>
> Original poster: "Barton B. Anderson by way of Terry Fritz
> <twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>" <tesla123-at-pacbell-dot-net>
>
> Hi John,
>
> I've been quiet due to "much to do" lately, but have been keeping up with
> this particular thread.
>
> > Original poster: "John H. Couture by way of Terry Fritz
> <twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>" <couturejh-at-mgte-dot-com>
> >
> > A problem arises when measuring the watts out when using sparks as
> outputs.
> > However, there is no problem if an incandescent lamp is used as an output.
>
> I've always had problems quantifying an efficient design without
> considering spark output. I might
> even go so far as to say "efficiency is not quantifyable from coil to
> coil". There are simply too many
> factors and each factor is apples and oranges depending on what mode the
> coil is running in. Ok, I
> digress in reverse. We could quantify, but the task is not attainable in
> our current mode of
> comparisons. If we both build 2 different coils and pick a black box test,
> transfer efficiency,
> whatever.., we would still have factors unaccounted for, mechanical and
> electrical methods would be
> different, and we would never come to a conclusion of which one is more
> efficient. As a matter of
> fact, one would probably light the black box lamp very bright and the other
> give the longest sparks
> (Murphy's law).
>
> In the end, "spark length for power input" is my choice of comparison due
> to it's simplicity. I think
> sparks are the perfect entity to compare by. It just takes a little human
> observation over enough
> sparks to get a good feel for what is efficient and what is not. I can't
> see a program truely
> identifying efficiency because they can't consider all the losses. Compare
> a spark length equation
> such as John Freau's. John achieved X at X input, but this other guy
> achieved longer or shorter at the
> same input - which one is more efficient? Who knows because losses are
> unknown (power output). But,
> power input and spark length is available and does give us at least some
> form of comparison. When we
> have methods to measure power output during normal running, "then" we can
> quantify the results and add
> them to programs. We will get there, were just not there yet.
>
> Take care,
> Bart