[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Double layer primary
- To: tesla@xxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: Double layer primary
- From: "Tesla list" <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 18:37:43 -0600
- Delivered-to: chip@pupman.com
- Delivered-to: tesla@pupman.com
- Old-return-path: <teslalist@twfpowerelectronics.com>
- Resent-date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 18:42:32 -0600 (MDT)
- Resent-from: tesla@xxxxxxxxxx
- Resent-message-id: <X1FPGB.A.7CF.JkxWCB@poodle>
- Resent-sender: tesla-request@xxxxxxxxxx
Original poster: "Malcolm Watts" <m.j.watts@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
On 11 Apr 2005, at 7:51, Tesla list wrote:
> Original poster: Blake Hartley <teslaspud@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> all,
>
> I test my coil a few hours ago and encountered a problem. the coil
> worked well and performance nearly doubled, even without tuning, but
> tuning is very difficult due to the proximity of the layers of the
> primary. Is it OK to just leave one tap on the bottem layer on and
> just adjust the top tap, or is it necessary to move them so that they
> are equidistant to the ends of the tubing? Any help would be much
> appreciated.
>
> Cheers,
> Blake
Without performing a detailed analysis I suspect that one option
would alter the coupling constant in a different fashion to the other
but other than that, you are simply changing the inductance and there
is no difference between the two in that respect.
Malcolm