Re: BPS vs. Resonant frequency (fwd)

["Tesla list" <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>]

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2007 13:16:28 -0700
From: Barton B. Anderson <bartb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: Tesla list <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: BPS vs. Resonant frequency (fwd)

Hi Scott,

You ask great questions! I know John said no (as he's probably already 
thought about this), but I personally haven't considered it. You could 
find out by modeling this situation in a flavor of spice. Microsim or 
similar should answer the question. I guess if it were me, I would start 
out banging the gap at Fr, then adjust the gap rate for the lower 
harmonics and octaves. Compare all to a standard 120 bps rate. This way, 
a single coil could be used to make the comparison versus changing the 
coil parameters to suit a particular harmonic or bps.

Take care,
Bart


Tesla list wrote:

>---------- Forwarded message ----------
>Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2007 16:01:14 -0400
>From: Scott Bogard <teslas-intern@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>To: tesla@xxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: BPS vs. Resonant frequency
>
>Hey all,
>     Here is a theoretical question for you guys.  Would there be any 
>advantage to designing a TC secondary system, so that it's resonant 
>frequency would be a harmonic, multiple, x octaves above, etc, of the BPS 
>(for example 122.88kHz for 120 BPS)?  Just curious.
>Scott Bogard.
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Local listings, incredible imagery, and driving directions - all in one 
>place! http://maps.live.com/?wip=69&FORM=MGAC01
>
>
>
>
>
>
>  
>