RE: First Light for 10" Coil.

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

Original poster: "John H. Couture" <couturejh-at-mgte-dot-com> 


Bart -

Again many thanks for your reply. As I told you before I do all the work you
are doing with JAVATC. However, I want to help as much as possible to make
your program the best TC program available. Having made a relatively simple
TC program I know the tremendous amount of work necessary to develop a
program like yours. I agree that adding Paul's work will make your program
the best available.

I hope you will not take my critique of your TC program as anything
personal. My object is to have your program  and maybe the JHCTES program
produce at the design stage outputs The parameters that will closely agree
with the test results coilers will find. This will also require test
procedures that coilers agree will produce real world parameters. In the
past there have been times when the program agreed with the tests. However
that did not occur often enough to say it was not coincidental.

All I can say at this point is that I believe you are making good progress
with your JAVATC computer program but I do not believe it is completely
finished. It is my feeling that the JAVATC outputs will approach closer to
coiler tests in the near future. What we need are coilers to do more testing
and publishing their results. That appears to be the case already because
there is much less emphasis now on long spark lengths and more data for
other parameters. Please let me know when I can be of help.

John Couture

-----------------------------------


-----Original Message-----
From: Tesla list [mailto:tesla-at-pupman-dot-com]
Sent: Sunday, December 28, 2003 1:10 PM
To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
Subject: Re: First Light for 10" Coil.


Original poster: Bart Anderson <classi6-at-classictesla-dot-com>

Hi John,

Apologies if this gets to the list a little late. I took a trip over the
Sierra's from Modesto to outside of Reno, Nevada (drop the kids off at
Grandma and Grandpa's for a winters vacation).

Tesla list wrote:

 >Original poster: "John H. Couture" <couturejh-at-mgte-dot-com>
 >
 >Bart -
 >
 >You can forget the reduction factors and the 47.4pf isolated toroid
 >capacitance for Peter's Tesla coil. The reason is because the surrounding
 >conditions that determine the toroid capacitance on his TC are completely
 >different. In fact there is no reason to call this a reduced toroid
 >capacitance because the toroid capacitance on the TC has nothing to do with
 >the capacitance that Inca, etc, calculates. The conditions around a Tesla
 >coil have nothing to do with a toroid in isolated space. I don't intend to
 >use "toroid capacity reduction" in the future.

Well, I'm not sure I agree. I would say it does, except that it has the
influence of the ground plane. I really don't see a problem using a factor,
even if standard Wheeler inductances are used, or maybe I should just say
standard meter reading capable L's and C's are used, as long as the factors
agree with the end result.

 >So lets start over and also use real numbers of a real TC like 145.49 and
 >84.43. For Peter's TC if you use a computer program or manual calcs (brave
 >coilers) these two frequencies will not be available to you.

Or will they. If you input the groundplane, secondary, primary, toroid, and
strike ring into Javatc, here's what follows:
80.87 kHz = loaded Fres, which is pretty close to the measured 84.43 kHz.
146.39 kHz = unloaded Fres. Pretty darn close to the measured 145.59 kHz.

msnip.........