[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: The 1500t secondary myth
- To: tesla@xxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: The 1500t secondary myth
- From: "Tesla list" <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 11:06:54 -0700
- Delivered-to: testla@pupman.com
- Delivered-to: tesla@pupman.com
- Old-return-path: <teslalist@twfpowerelectronics.com>
- Resent-date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 11:12:50 -0700 (MST)
- Resent-from: tesla@xxxxxxxxxx
- Resent-message-id: <99jlX.A.bG.iMHxBB@poodle>
- Resent-sender: tesla-request@xxxxxxxxxx
Original poster: "Gerry Reynolds" <gerryreynolds@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Hi Tom,
I'm thinking that maybe you should have left the primary tank cap the same
since its value is determined by how much your power source can charge.
When you went from 750 turns to 1100 turns, you would then reaquire tuning
by adding more primary turns.
Gerry R.
> Original poster: "Tom Luttrell PWRCOM" <tom@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> This was my thinking when I posted the (admittedly sensationalisticly
> titled) topic.
>
> The change from 750 turns of 20AWG wire to 1100 turns of 22AWG wire (and
> proportionally larger primary tank cap) produced no noticeable change in
> output. I presumed this was due to resistive loss on the thinner wire,
> and perhaps greater losses in the primary circuit due to higher peak
> currents.
>