Re: Variation of secondary Q

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

Original poster: "Malcolm Watts by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>" <m.j.watts-at-massey.ac.nz>

Hi Terry,

On 15 Mar 2002, at 20:15, Tesla list wrote:

> Original poster: "Terry Fritz" <twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>
> 
> Hi Malcolm and All,
> 
> I set my big coil up indoors using the techinque below.   I am seeing about
> +- 0.5% variation in Q.  That is really low so I am now checking the
> stability of the tests equipment to be sure the variation is not there.  So
> far, the variation in Q is very small and within the long term drift of the
> test equipment.  Probably won't be able to do any outdoor testing till next
> week.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> 	Terry

You mentioned a drop of around 2kHz with the direct connection. I 
think I'd prefer to monitor the e-field with no direct connection. 
The equipment will be swamping any variation to some extent I think.
To Ed: we are testing without sparks.

Regards,
Malcolm

<snip>