Re: 12 MV 100 years ago

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

Original poster: "boris petkovic by way of Terry Fritz <teslalist-at-qwest-dot-net>" <petkovic7-at-yahoo-dot-com>


  > Original poster: "Malcolm Watts by way of Terry
  Fritz
  <teslalist-at-qwest-dot-net>" <m.j.watts-at-massey.ac.nz>
   >
   > Some sources say that Tesla reached
 > voltages like 12 MV
 >  >  >  >  using  his magnifier in Colorado Springs.
 >  >  >
 >  >  > 12 MV is comparable to natural lightning which
 > is between 10 and 120
 > MV.
 >  >  > This is much less than you would expect from 1
 > MV giving 4 feet with a
 > Tesla
 >  >  > coil due to the nature of spark propagation.
 >  >  > The biggest tesla coils currently at around 55
 > ft are about 5.5 MV.
 >  >  > The longest spark described at 100m (325ft)
 > was generated by a 5 MV
 >  >  > generator in Siberia.
 >  >  > References for these statements on my website
 > at
 >  >  >
 >
http://members.iinet-dot-net.au/~pterren/Tesla%20coils%20intro.htm
 >  >  > Peter (Tesla Downunder)
 >  >
 >  > I had a look at one of those references. There is
 > a bald statement
 >  > that Vout = such and such without a scrap of
 > theoretical
 >  > justification for the formula. In fact, a
 > consideration of output
 >  > voltage taking energy conservation into account
 > invalidates the
 >  > claims made above. This has been known about for
 > a long time. I
 >  > posted something about this just a week or two
 > ago and there must be
 >  > dozens of messages dating back more than 7 years
 > in the list archives.
 >  > Malcolm
 >
Macolm,Peter,
You 2 are talking about 13M along the line ?
If this turns to be the case see my standpoints.
Personally, I'm not interested (*) in discusions of
type "TC voltages vs spark lenght",but I'll make
exception this time.

If 13M had been constructed as opimized 6th order
magnifier,it would have been able to deliver about 3.5
MV peaks on extra coil.This estimation is based on
bang energy 100 kW/120=833.3 Ws ,and ekvivalent energy
storage capacity of 3rd coil (+ no loss).
In this case all the energy orginaly stored in C1
would be transfered to Cee of extra coil.

However,the system is not designed to work in this
manner (judging by geometry apperance,taken waveforms
etc) but seemingly somewhere in "half way" between
ideal magnifier and ordinary 2 coil systerm (closer to
the latter).I think the attention was payed mostly to
fast transfer time without special care of energy
distribution among elements of HV circuit.Thus the
estimation  in this case would be about 2,5 MV.
Proving that circulating amount of energy is esential
factor for long discharge of TC.

There is rather weird calculation on ttr site assuming
some kind of energy conservation between bangs.(120
BPS but 39 sparks observed.So 4.2 MV estimated).I'm
missing point here.Where the energy should be stored
in?Circulating in circuits?
Can't be true,Q is a way too low for 120 BPS.
In charge cloud that hangs around toroid?
If this is addressed I've missed it.
Theoreticaly,it  could be possible to find point in
space around extra coil which in certain
moment,supported by background TC voltage posses the
highest potential (maybe even higher than
V2=V1sgrtC1/C2).So help me mr.Poisson to solve that
riddle.Not to mention charging ,dissipating,attracting
repealing and forming the cloud densities in quite an
esoteric way.
One way or another this wouldn't be a TC voltage,and
shouldn't be refered as such.

I can be weird too saying that every little coil
operating in vacuum can "generate" 511kV with small
(say 0.05J) bang size but I don't want to offend
people dealing with pulse transformers electron beam
accelerators.


(*)=becouse spark lenght in repetitive shock excited
TC is useless factor for estimating terminal voltage.

best regards,
Boris