Original poster: "resonance" <resonance@xxxxxxxxxxxx>2 to 3X sec coil length is producing a tremendous amount of stress on a coil. Good HV engineering would require some prudence in initial design especially if an experimenter is doing it from scratch. My intent was to intice him to use baffles to prevent problems.
I know sometimes one can get away with up to 2 X coil length spark discharges, but it's pushing common sense to not use baffles. As I said, the time spent repairing the coil could be saved by spending an extra 15 minutes installing baffles when the coil is initially constructed.
I actually had a friend who drove a 65 Mustang 289 engine for over 90,000 miles and never changed the oil once. He always said, "Hey --- it' still running!" I just shook my head and smiled --- and wished him well on long trips after dark. I never did see him walking!
Dr. Resonance
Hi, So, an internal baffle is basically an internal creepage disk ? Why arn't more people using creepage disks on the outside of the're secondary? ........I havnt used either yet, but my coils arnt that 'high performance',..usualy between 2.5 - 3 X the winding lenght.....spark............From: "Tesla list" <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx> To: tesla@xxxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: secondary question... Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2006 08:11:31 -0600 >Original poster: "resonance" <resonance@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > >It's not the dia. of the coil that determines whether or not a >baffle is necessary. It's the spark length as compared to the >length of the coil. Anytime a spark length approaches or exceeds >coil length a baffle should be employed. It's easy and time >efficient as compared to hours of sanding, resealing, and perhaps >rewinding a secondary that has flashed over internally. > >Dr. Resonance