[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Keeping up with the theory (was is Corum and Corumforbidden topic?)
Original poster: "Malcolm Watts by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>" <m.j.watts-at-massey.ac.nz>
On 7 May 2002, at 8:21, Tesla list wrote:
> Original poster: "Ray von Postel by way of Terry Fritz
> As you say, there are two issues. However, when you go beyond, what you
> as "back of the envelope" engineering and start using a computer, don't
> you think
> it time to take as much advantage of it's number crunching power as
> possible? Why
> use approximations when you can do better?
> Example: Why use Wheeler when Nagoka's formulas are more accurate?
> There is
> no need to use tables when you can calculate Nagoka's constant. Just
> calculate the
> needed constant each time you use the program and to any degree of accuracy
> within the limits of the computer.
For the purposes I outlined, Wheeler and Medhurst work just fine
every time. No need for computers - or even a calculator. I have the
conversion factors for Medhurst memorized for the range of h/d ratios
I use. The formulae are so simple that it isn't a major chore to do
the calcs mentally. This is not cutting edge research - it is a
simple way of building a working coil.
> You also mentioned the problems associated with top loading. Perhaps
> that should
> be the first project. I didn't intend to set priorities.
I can use fairly good guestimates based on experience and these get
initial tuning close enough for power to be applied safely. Again,
this is just for a quick coil lashup, not research. My research
methods are considerably more scientific than that.
> I presume you disagree that this is "getting a bit far from coiling". I
> just meant
> it was probably not of interest to many and I was being a bore. Or, have I
> >>This seems to be getting a bit far from coiling, I would be glad to
> >>discussion off list.
> >Don't agree - unless I've misunderstood.