[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: Iron transformer positioning under the primary experiment

Original poster: "Garry Freemyer" <garryfre@xxxxxxxxxxx>

Hehe I thought of the exact same thing, that the voltage would not be
significant but then I remembered, that if a coil streamer strikes the
primary winding, the low amperage secondary system could suddenly be
brimming with amperage.

I was too sleepy to realize, that a high frequency low voltage signal would
probably not help a low voltage low frequency signal to burn a carbon track.

Never type while asleep! :)

-----Original Message-----
From: Tesla list [mailto:tesla@xxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2006 7:31 AM
To: tesla@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Iron transformer positioning under the primary experiment

Original poster: "Gerry  Reynolds" <gerryreynolds@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Hi Garry,

I suspect this is exactly what DC is getting at.  However, we should
probably keep things in perspective.  If we assume 20KV is being
discharged into, say a 10 turn primary, each turn will have
2000V.  There may be a loop created between the NST terminals and the
Terry filter equivilent to a one turn loop antenna that could be
coupled into by the primary by some amount. Lets say the coupling is
the same as between primary and secondary and is k=0.15.  This would
result in a 300V signal coupled into this NST/filter loop bypassing
the filter benefit to some extent - probably not significant compared
to the 20KV RF that the Terry filter is trying to keep off the NST.

Gerry R.

>Original poster: "Garry Freemyer" <garryfre@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>Hmm, I wonder if he means that parts of the filter might act as antennas
>that pick up high frequency.
>It would be a rather conclusive experiment to scope the outputs of the NST
>and see if moving the filter has any effect.
>If it proves the Doctor right, it would be a good case for possibly
>enclosing the filter in some sort of grounded, gel or wax filled metal
>container and see if that has any fixes. Any coil that I might have that
>more than 3 parts to remember to take along would be a nightmare, of me
>forgetting parts at home and at destination.
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Tesla list [mailto:tesla@xxxxxxxxxx]
>Sent: Monday, July 10, 2006 12:16 PM
>To: tesla@xxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: RE: Iron transformer positioning under the primary experiment
>Original poster: "Lau, Gary" <Gary.Lau@xxxxxx>
>Hi Dr:
>I'm curious why you suggest that a Terry filter is of no value if it's
>under the primary coil.  If the NST(s) were located remotely from the
>coil assembly, then I'd agree that locating the filter under the primary
>is bad, but only because it's distant from the NST's.  But if the NST is
>also close to the primary, I don't see how the filter's proximity to the
>primary compromises its effectiveness.  Or were you just cautioning not
>to locate the filter far from the NST's?
>Regards, Gary Lau
>  > Original poster: "Dr. Resonance" <resonance@xxxxxxxxxx>
>  >
>  >
>  > It's not only the metal proximity that should be considered.  Any
>  > closed turns in a transformer coil that are under or near the primary
>  > coil will pick up spurious spikes and may damage the transformer or
>  > induce these nasty very low microsecond spikes into the 60 Hertz
>  > power line.  Also, directly under the primary, a Terry filter really
>  > is of no value.
>  >
>  > It is easy and cheap to simply enclose the power transformer and
>  > Terry filter in a suitable enclosure 5-6 feet away from the coil.  No
>  > need to take chances.  It is simply poor engineering practice.
>  >
>  > Dr. Resonance