RE: The PING Test

["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>

Hello John,

On 24 Sep 2002, at 11:46, Tesla list wrote:

> Original poster: "John H. Couture by way of Terry Fritz
<twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>" <couturejh-at-mgte-dot-com>
> 
> 
> Malcolm -
> 
> One way of looking at this result is to consider the overall efficiency
> which would then be
> 
>   OAE = 400 x 100/(300 x 8) = 16.67%

I hardly need to point out that Q is proportional to efficiency so 
that assertion doesn't make sense.
 
> But how did you get the Q of 300? I have not as yet found Q's that high. Did
> you use the Ping test? What were the parameters of the secondary coil?

I have posted details of this coil so many times I simply can't be 
bothered doing it again. There will posts of mine in the list 
archives with the relevant details. I've mentioned it sometime in the 
past couple of months on the list (yet again). There is also an 
article of mine somewhere on Terry's website giving details of the 
secondary. Q's that high are not difficult to obtain if you know how. 
I've used both ping tests and steady state swept frequencies to 
measure the coil.

Regards,
Malcolm