[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

*To*: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com*Subject*: Re: Keeping up with the theory (was is Corum and Corumforbidden topic?)*From*: "Tesla list" <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>*Date*: Fri, 03 May 2002 19:49:57 -0600*Resent-Date*: Fri, 3 May 2002 19:50:11 -0600*Resent-From*: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com*Resent-Message-ID*: <eYZQGC.A.jhD.Q5z08-at-poodle>*Resent-Sender*: tesla-request-at-pupman-dot-com

Original poster: "Terry Fritz" <twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net> Hi Ray, Paul's program number crunches from pure basic physics. No empirical stuff there :-)) No experimental data is needed except to verify that it is working properly. However, unlike a nice closed form equation, the programs simulate the physics of a coil and literally calculate the thing out using trillions of math operations... E-Tesla6 uses curve fitted equations from data collected from Paul's program running an array of coils for Les, but the rest is also pure math and physics. Strictly speaking, I guess it does not need any experimental data either since it can all be done with a computer. Granted we are not deriving the answer from great over all God like knowledge, but we are just good enough to get a computer to reproduce the physics of a coil that we arbitrarily type in and the computer crunches the answer we would see if we actually built and ran it. I guess it depends one how one defines "empirical". In a way, we just measure a computer simulation rather than an actual coil. However, we do know far more about how the data is made where in an experimental case we may just have a set of data and have no idea how it is related to anything... Pual's program is based on the physics in the paper at: http://hot-streamer-dot-com/temp/pn2511-10e.pdf There is not a lot of "guess work" in it :-)) Of course, Medhurst and Wheeler are pure empirical data fitted equations from tons of experimental data. A few of us like to watch coils operate on computer screens but we get out to the real sparks now and then too ;-) I will admit, "I" get just as much fun out of the computer kind :o)) However, most people rate fun in the amount of nitrogen burned ;-)) Cheers, Terry At 04:54 PM 5/3/2002 -0700, you wrote: >Terry: >I agree that the equations and programs being used give practical values, >but as far as I know they are derived by curve fitting or some other >method of approximation. > >Because they are based on experimental data, they can only be considered >reliable over the range of data upon which they are based. > >My suggested project would be to come up with a mathematically >derived equation or set of equations which can be proven general >in application for a SOLENOID. > >Empirically derived equations/formula are sometimes a first step. >Fortunately, those for distributed capacitance of a solenoid are >close enough to be useful engineering tools. As you say, they >are within a few percent. I suggest that "a few percent" may >be satisfactory engineering, but it is not necessarily good science. >At this point, we don't know if the lack of precision and accuracy >of both our calculations and experimental data is hiding something >totally unknown and unsuspected. > >Please don't take this as a put down. The computer programs and >other works are, to the best of my knowledge, state of the art. My >objective >was to point out that we do not know with certainty a fundamental >fact relating to a major component, the solenoid. I also recognize that >many of list members have no interest in calculations. Their enjoyment >is based on a different perspective than mine. Perhaps I aim to fall >within the definition of expert: > >"An expert is someone who knows more and more about less and less >until he knows everything about nothing." > >Best > >Ray > > > >Tesla list wrote: > >>Original poster: "Terry Fritz" <twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net> >> >>Hi Ray, >> >big snip > >> >>E-Tesla6 does this: >> >>E-Tesla6 - The next version of E-Tesla that uses the latest secondary >>voltage profile data from Paul Nicholson's TSSP project. This program >>predicts the resonant frequency of a secondary coil and top load given the >>physical dimensions of the secondary and toroid. >> >> >>http://www.abelian.demon.co.uk/tssp/model.html >> >>Medhurst's formula works very well on a bare secondary coil but cannot do a >>coil with a top terminal. >> >>All these methods are accurate with a few percent. Paul's is by far the >>most sophisticated and versatile. >> >>The programs are not actually "equations" but big number crunchers. One >>may be able to come up with empirical equations from Pauls' giant >>calculated data base: >> >>http://www.abelian.demon.co.uk/tssp/vsd/ >> >>Cheers, >> >> Terry >> >> >> >> >> > >

- Prev by Date:
**Re: Malfunctioning MOT** - Next by Date:
**Re: nitrogen laser triggered gap** - Prev by thread:
**Re: Keeping up with the theory (was is Corum and Corumforbidden topic?)** - Next by thread:
**Re: Keeping up with the theory (was is Corum and Corumforbidden topic?)** - Index(es):