Re: Safety gap issues

["Tesla list" <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Original poster: Yurtle Turtle <yurtle_t@xxxxxxxxx>

That's what I meant, though my typing fingers got
ahead of my brain. I was trying to point out that he
shouldn't use RMS values, but should instead use peak
values for this.

thanks for clarifying this.

Adam

--- Tesla list <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Original poster: "Bob (R.A.) Jones"
> <a1accounting@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Hi,
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Tesla list" <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
> To: <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Monday, November 28, 2005 8:29 AM
> Subject: Re: Safety gap issues
>
>
>  > Original poster: Yurtle Turtle
> <yurtle_t@xxxxxxxxx>
>  >
>  > It's the first. This is basically a conservation
> of
>  > energy equation. It also assumes no losses, which
>  > isn't realistic, especially if you don't have a
> good
>  > spark gap.
>  >
>  > E = .5CV^2
>  > assume Epri = Esec, that gives you
>  > .5CpriVpri^2 = .5CsecVsec^2
>  > rearranging give you
>  > Vsec=sqrt(Cpri/Csec)
>  >
>  > Volts are RMS, Csec includes the secondary's self
>  > capacitance and the topload.
>  >
> In the first equation above the voltage is usually
> defined as an actual
> voltage not rms.
>
> Robert (R. A.) Jones
> A1 Accounting, Inc., Fl
> 407 649 6400
>
>
>