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

Re: [TCML] New Double Toroid idea works!



You could try a 3" or 4" copper pipe for the interconnect.

Dr. Resonance



On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 6:12 PM, bartb <bartb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Hi Phil,
>
> Very cool! I am no doubt surprised regarding the toroid interconnect. I
> wasn't originally thinking of a 4" transmission line, but rather a rod of
> sorts. Regardless, I still would have figured the smaller radius would have
> promoted some problems, but apparently that's not the case. I wonder if each
> toroid was adding some shielding to the transmission line? But 34" is a
> decent distance apart, so had I even known the final details in the
> beginning, I still would have expected transmission breakout. Go figure!
>
> You know what would be an interesting test is to extend the edge to edge
> transmission distance (if the flex allows) and see if it remains controlled.
>
> Excellent experiment! I'm really glad you tried it. Opinions and theory are
> guides, but only experiments can prove or disprove an idea.
>
> Great job!
> Bart
>
> FIFTYGUY@xxxxxxx wrote:
>
>> Remember when Scott Bogard wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Adding a top load lowers the tesla coils resonant frequency, what about
>>>
>>>
>> adding a bottom load?  Would
>>
>>> putting a toroid or some kind of  capacitor between the coil and ground
>>>
>>>
>> lower the coils resonant frequency?
>>      At first glance it didn't seem like much of an  idea. But it *did*
>> get me to thinking:
>>
>>
>>> Could one run a "transmission line" from the  topload to another  toroid
>>>
>>>
>> some
>>
>>> distance away? And then use breakouts on this  second  topload to force
>>> it
>>>
>> to
>>
>>> act as the main discharge point? Seems safer  and  easier than a
>>> magnifier configuration, but with all the  spacing  benefits. Plus easier to
>>> make and transport two separate  small toroids than  one big one.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Bart didn't think much of this:
>>
>>
>>> Not sure. I doubt it. The transmission line would likely be the  breakout
>>> point if of a 2 coil systems normal turns. Note in maggy's, the driver has
>>> >only 200 to 300
>>>
>> turns.
>>
>>> The extra coil is the high turn coil. If the driver had high turns, the
>>> transmission line would be a  serious breakout problem.
>>>
>>> What appears good in visualization is rarely true  in reality (physics is
>>>
>>>
>> the
>>
>>> cause).
>>>
>>>
>>       Well, guess what? It works *very* well, thank  you!
>>    I've been having chronic problems with my Pig SISG  killing itself by
>> secondary strikes hitting the electronics under the primary.  So a few weeks
>> ago, I set up my "extra" toroid and gave it a try!
>>    I kept my "good" toroid (very smooth home made 8" x  36") over the
>> secondary. I had a spare "ugly" 8" x 36", so I located it at the  same
>> height, but 70" away (center-to-center, so 34" edge-to-edge). I put the
>>  "extra" toroid on a piece of 8" PVC pipe. I connected the two with a piece
>> of 4"  OD aluminum flexduct.
>>    Despite the much smaller radius of curvature, at no  time did any
>> streamers come from the 4" flexduct.
>>    With a breakout point on the "extra" toroid, all  the streamers came
>> from the extra. When I started pushing way too much power  into the coil, a
>> few streamers occasionally came from the main toroid to an  unlucky piece of
>> nearby plywood sheeting. But one doesn't usually put 8 kVA into  a 6"
>> non-maggy coil with an 8x36  toroid!
>>    Yes, I had to re-tune because of the extra topload  capacitance. This
>> was actually quite convenient. For one, it allows you to  significantly
>> increase the topload without having to resort to a single,  awkwardly large
>> toroid. Stacking toroids vertically seems to allow only minimal  gains
>> because they get "lumped" electrostatically.    Sure, you decrease the
>> Cprim/Csec ratio which  theoretically lowers the voltage gain. But at the
>> same time, I've heard the  larger Csec mitigates harmonics, stores more
>> charge before breakout, and  increases the discharge current during each
>> bang.    With no other modifications other than adding the  extra toroid and
>> retuning, I'd say the spark length increased 10-15%. It was  noticeable, and
>> surprising. Maybe it was really due to lower losses in the SISG  from a
>> lower Fres and lower primary current. All I know is that it definitely
>>  helped!
>>    Not willing to leave well enough alone, I decided  to move the primary
>> tap back to fewer turns, and increase the primary cap for  more power.
>> That's how I ended up running .150 uF of primary cap, and  blowing up
>> another SISG section. Maybe when I hook up the 12" coil and I  can get the
>> Fres way down, I'll push it to .300 uF and see how long  things last...
>>  -Phil LaBudde
>> Center for the Advanced Study of Ballistic  Improbabilities
>>
>>
>>
>> **************Wondering what's for Dinner Tonight? Get new twists on
>> family favorites at AOL Food.      (
>> http://food.aol.com/dinner-tonight?NCID=aolfod00030000000001)
>> _______________________________________________
>> Tesla mailing list
>> Tesla@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> http://www.pupman.com/mailman/listinfo/tesla
>>
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tesla mailing list
> Tesla@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://www.pupman.com/mailman/listinfo/tesla
>
_______________________________________________
Tesla mailing list
Tesla@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.pupman.com/mailman/listinfo/tesla