Re: Ground system for outside operation: Counterpoise?

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

Original poster: "Antonio Carlos M. de Queiroz by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>" <acmq-at-compuland-dot-com.br>

Tesla list wrote:
> 
> Original poster: "davep by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>"
<davep-at-quik-dot-com>

>         However operation with breakout, or even full power
>         sub breakout may be _different_.

I just wanted to make clear that you would not like to touch the base
of the secondary with a coil operating at full power. Breakout with
streamers increases the effective capacitance of the terminal, and
requires a correspondingly lower ground impedance. But the difference
is not big.
 
>         I think this is an area open for experimentation.
>         Thoughts:
>         There ie ALWAYS a 'ground', sometimes explicit or:
>                 sometimes provided by stray capacity at base
>                 of coil,
>                 sometimes, i suspect, provided by quasi
>                 invisible corona or spark at base 'finding'
>                 ground.

Ok.
 
>         The current at base may be hinger than current at top:
>         If there is a 1/4 wave voltage peak at top, then there
>         is a 1/4 wave _currrent_  peak at bottom.

The current in the secondary coil wire at the base is greater than 
at the top, but it is identical to the "displacement current" that 
flowns in the capacitances between the coil and of the terminal
and the ground.
 
>         (I recognize my second comment is subject to debate &
>         disagreement...   8)>>)

The approximation is good if the coil has no top load. A terminal
cuts the waveforms in the coil before the 1/4 wave point, but 
at the bottom the approximation works.

Antonio Carlos M. de Queiroz