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

Re: Jonathon's 6" Coil (fwd) -> Streamer length to voltage (fwd)

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2007 00:01:14 -0500
From: resonance <resonance@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: Tesla list <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Jonathon's 6" Coil (fwd) -> Streamer length to voltage (fwd)

It only changes the sec res freq by less than 1/2%.  You can adjust 
accurately for the retune on the pri using an oscope, so now you are back in 
perfect resonance (well maybe not completely perfect, but very close). 
Usually pri retune is less than 1/12th of a turn for the rod gap if it 
sticks out over the sec toroid.  We usually stick it out 30 inches.

At this point the rod gap system works very well because the sec max 
potential is independent on the waveform, ie, it can be a DC pulse from a 
Marx generator or a single shot from a resonance transformer ---- same spark 
length vs. potential as long as it's a single shot.

I also used Terry F's antenna system to do voltage calibration at 8 ft.  We 
used a 200 kV steady DC power supply on the toroid to get the base readings.

I also did considerable calibration and testing with a generating vane field 
electrostatic voltmeter calibrated to Natl Bureau of Standards --- borrowed 
it from the Pelletron guys in Middleton who use it to accurately calibrate 
and test their Pelletron Van de Graaffs in the range of 2 MEV thru 35 MEV 
with 1% accuracy.

Also did the standard equation as I mentioned, and the results were very 
similar using all 4 methods for small, medium, and large coils.

I really am convinced this is quite accurate.  There was nearly perfect 
correlations minus a percent for experimental error.

I do see your point though --- the actual charge potential could be 
different than breakout, but the electrostatic field voltage meter really 
does not load the system appreciably.

Resonance Research Corp.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Tesla list" <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2007 9:23 PM
Subject: Re: Jonathon's 6" Coil (fwd) -> Streamer length to voltage (fwd)

> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 21:53:15 -0700
> From: Barton B. Anderson <bartb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: Tesla list <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: Jonathon's 6" Coil (fwd) -> Streamer length to voltage (fwd)
> I agree, streamer length of random free air spark lengths is not useful
> to predict top terminal voltage. This just can't be done. There are too
> many variables involved. We can guestimate, but that guestimate can vary
> a great deal.
> The last item I remember for the TSSP: we were involved with accurately
> measuring the top voltage at the terminal. This is where the TSSP
> stopped (incase anyone is wondering). There were plenty of theory's of
> how to measure it, but there were just as many downfalls in about every
> theory (much debate and head scratching). I think the technology to do
> this was met with real concern to be accurate, and each possibility (the
> latest devices of the day) were looked at. Maybe the technology to do
> this is just beyond us. It was an amazing time in the TCML. I hate to be
> broken, but when it comes to top terminal voltage, this is not a trivial
> task for a high frequency/high voltage resonant transformer. Without
> considering a lot of the detail, some will say "use a capacitive
> divider" or other mechanism, but those have all been considered (believe
> me). It was those type of discussions that were debated. If we could
> actually measure top voltage without affecting the resonant status of
> the coil, the project might actually continue. The future in this area
> is completely open.
> Take care,
> Bart
> Tesla list wrote:
>>---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2007 08:54:33 -0400
>>From: "Lau, Gary" <Gary.Lau@xxxxxx>
>>To: Tesla list <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>Subject: RE: Jonathon's 6" Coil (fwd) -> Streamer length to voltage
>>I thought that the consensus was that streamer length is not a useful
>>predictor of voltage.  I think TC sparks are like Jacobs Ladder sparks,
>>in that they grow over time from a much smaller length that IS based on
>>the actual voltage.  How TC sparks grow and how far they'll grow is
>>based on many factors that are not well understood.
>>In all the years I've been on this list, I've not heard of anyone
>>devising a method of actually measuring the topload voltage.  The best
>>that may be done is equating the primary bang voltage/energy to
>>secondary voltage/energy and coming up with a theoretical maximum Vsec,
>>assuming no (ha!) losses.  I guess no one can prove your claimed voltage
>>wrong so you can claim anything you like (unless you exceeded the
>>theoretical maximum), but in scientific circles, there would be
>>I too would be interested in where your length-to-voltage data
>>originated, and more importantly, how it was verified.
>>Gary Lau
>>>Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2007 15:43:54 -0500
>>>From: resonance <resonance@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>To: Tesla list <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>>Subject: Re: Jonathon's 6" Coil (fwd)
>>>Nice to hear you have your coil running properly.
>>>BTW, 46 inch streamers represent around 240 kV in Tesla coil service.
>>>Resonance Research Corp.