[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Describing coils by their diameter, was Jonathon's 6" Coil (fwd)
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2007 18:14:46 EDT
From: FutureT@xxxxxxx
To: tesla@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Describing coils by their diameter, was Jonathon's 6" Coil (fwd)
In a message dated 6/29/2007 8:11:01 A.M. US Eastern Standard Time,
tesla@xxxxxxxxxx writes:
> Great Performance ! but don't stop at 46". The 6.5" coil has a lot more
> potential. Bill Pollack and I built a 6.5" coil in 1998 that produced 72"
> arc's.
Lately I see folks referring to their coils by the secondary diameter. For
example a *6 inch coil*, or an *8 inch coil*, etc. Then they are comparing
sparks lengths, etc, for a given size diameter. The height of a coil is
extremely important. It's really more important than the diameter. For
example
consider two coils; one is 6" x 20", the other is 6" x 32". The 6" x 32"
will be capable of much longer sparks because it will withstand a much
higher breakdown voltage, and there will be less tendency for the sparks
to arc to the primary. By considering only the diameter, two people could
build a 6 inch coil, and the one with the (taller) 32" height could say,
"My coil
is much better. It gives much longer sparks". And assuming a good
overall design and enough power, they would be correct. Yet it would not
really be a fair comparison. I prefer to describe the coil by
its input power or spark length. For example someone could say, "This
is my 5kW coil and it gives this certain spark length. This could then
be compared with someone else's 5kW coil. Or someone might say,
"This is my 42" spark coil. It uses 620 watts". This could then be
compared with other coils that give 42" sparks, and the power input
could be compared to judge the "efficiency" of the coil. This is not
the engineering definition of efficiency that I'm speaking of, of course.
John
************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.