Re: double wound secondary (fwd)

["Tesla list" <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>]

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sat, 06 Oct 2007 15:05:41 -0700
From: Barton B. Anderson <bartb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: Tesla list <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: double wound secondary (fwd)

Hi Scott,

The cylindrical idea would easy to wind but mechanically challenging as 
far as top mount connections. Kind of like installing square tires on 
your car (why?). But a stack of flat pancake coils is pretty cool. This 
is electrically workable but of course even more difficult to construct.

You should take a look a Kurt Schraner's induction coils. He's done 
something similar.
http://home.datacomm.ch/k.schraner/induc_build.htm

Take care,
Bart

Tesla list wrote:

>---------- Forwarded message ----------
>Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2007 14:41:03 -0400
>From: Scott Bogard <teslas-intern@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>To: Tesla list <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: RE: double wound secondary (fwd)
>
>
>     If winding secondaries in series is impossible on one coil form
>because of inevitable breakdown problems, would it be possible to wind two
>coils in series on separate concentric forms, one outside the other.  I
>don't see any real advantage, as the inductance may actually be too high,
>but if the space was filled with oil or plastic, it may be possible to
>pull off.  For that matter, you could have a cylinder/pancake coil, with
>many concentric layers of maybe 100 windings each.  Just musing. Scott
>Bogard.
>
>  
>
>>Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2007 11:17:10 -0600
>>From: tesla@xxxxxxxxxx
>>To: tesla@xxxxxxxxxx
>>Subject: Re: double wound secondary (fwd)
>>
>>
>>---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>Date: Fri, 05 Oct 2007 08:11:47 -0700
>>From: Ed Phillips <evp@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>To: Tesla list <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>Subject: Re: double wound secondary (fwd)
>>
>>2 layer coils.  If in parallel (as in Tesla service) then no effective 
>>change in inductance just half the resistance. If connected in series then 4 
>>times the inductance but useless for Tesla coil work as the end of one coil 
>>will be adjacent to the start of the next but with 50% of the voltage across 
>>it.
>>Does anyone really disgree with this?
>>Peter"
>>
>>	Certainly not around this house!!!!!  
>>
>>	The reference to voltage between turns should be emphasized - no one would want a coil built this way.  Problems enough with breakdown between adjacent or "crossed over" turns.....................
>>
>>Ed
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>    
>>
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Windows Live Hotmail and Microsoft Office Outlook ? together at last. ?Get it now.
>http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/outlook/HA102225181033.aspx?pid=CL100626971033
>
>
>
>
>
>  
>