Re: [TCML] NE Ohio Teslathon Postponed

["John Forcina" <forcijo10@xxxxxxxxx>]

I happen to live part time in Richfield and i will be here the 19th so i can
head over there.  I probably wont bring my big coil because it is a pain to
haul around but i have a can crusher along with a marx generator and a
couple other things that i can bring.

On Sun, Sep 7, 2008 at 3:31 PM, Harvey Norris <harvich@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>    I will now aim for Fri Sept 19th as a tentative date for holding a
> regional conference for NE  Ohio coilers to demonstrate their machines. We
> may be offering secondaries for sale wound on 4.5 in diameter PVC tubing.
>  Our own demonstration will consist in comparisons from an ordinary Delco
> Remy car alternator with diodes removed to output 3 phases of 456 hz to
> power a tesla coil via pole pig transformer.  The comparison will consist of
> using the same secondary and then powering the TC from a 60 hz 15,000
> volt,30 ma NST. It can be shown and argued by voltage and amperage
> measurements that the alternator can input more energy to the TC then the
> NST, and this is quite unexpected to say the least since only one of three
> phases of the AC alternator are utilized. The 456 hz TC utilizes a smaller
> primary and 2.5 times the capacity the the NST design utilizes.
>    I had picked my birthday of Sept 7th for the teslathon, as I had held
> many years back when Marc Metlica attended several times. A possibility
> exists of incorporating his idea of a triggered arc gap in which all three
> phases of the alternator three phase source could be utilized. By postponing
> the event until the 19th this and other further arrangements can be looked
> into. I am also looking for any URL references showing his idea of using a
> dimmer switch for the triggered arc gap.
>    The garage area is sufficiently cleaned out so that both an indoor
> and/or outdoor event can take place. Things are still in disarray from this
> long needed garage cleanup.  In the alternator/pole pig connection  I have
> procured a special situation whereby the capacitance employed in the TC
> primary is reflected through the pole pig primary connection to the
> alternator stator windings so as to resonate producing two useful effects,
> but first the understanding of the principle of maximum energy transfer is
> noted, so that the comparison of actual currents and voltages can be
> compared to this theory of maximum energy transfer.  Generally speaking the
> two specifications noting the ability of the source of emf to produce power
> are given; these are the open circuit voltage without a load attached, and
> the current that source can deliver when a short is applied.  What the
> maximum energy transfer theorem implies is that when the open circuit
> voltage is cut in
>  half by the amount of load attached, this is the point of maximum energy
> transfer, but in this situation only half of the short rating of available
> amperage conduction is available.  Thus the maximum power or voltage times
> amperage from the source is actually each of these ratings cut in half and
> then multiplied together, yielding one quarter of what would be available if
> the power ratings of open circuit voltage and short measurement of amperage
> were simply multiplied together. Thus this maximum power output of the NST
> should be [15,000 V* .03A]/4 = 112.5 watts.  Now the same procedure is
> applied to the alternator phase as a source of power. Because of the fact
> that the pole face field rotor becomes remanently magnetized,(in the correct
> polarity determined by its spin), the moment the alternator is turned on
> these voltage and amperage ratings become apparent. All three phases then
> read 1.6 -1.7 volts and a short of one of the phases shows a delivery of
>  1.35 A. Now the pole pig is attached to one of the phases with the
> addition of an amperage meter set on its highest scale without the
>  secondary load of the TC primary attached.  This one threw me a loop
> because on the testing of two different higher voltage transformers, both
> amperage readings of the non loaded primary read 0 Amps. Apparently the open
> secondary condition of the pole pig transformer that determines the highest
> impedance of the primary has a non-linear response to the increase of
> frequency, where here the increase in frequency being 7.6 fold would mean
> 7.6 times less primary amperage conduction to the unloaded pole pig primary,
> but that may not be happening and later the actual ratio of expected
> currents vs derived currents can be calculated to show the non-linear
> increase of impedance with increased frequency. This has been noted before
> with the stolen high induction air core coils that exhibited 60 henry at 60
> hz, but exhibited values
>  near 200 henry at these frequencies.
>     Now the first attempt of showing an alternator powered TC involved
> first making one at 60 hz powered by the NST, and that also was problematic
> but we arrived at a hit/miss solution with a 2 ft secondary with a larger
> top capacity that improved performance so as to exhibit 4 inch arcing.  This
> model uses 20 nf capacity.  When the alternator/pole pig combination was
> substituted as the power source the same coil only delivered 1 inch arcing,
> but even this was a first. Jumping the gun a bit, the alternator/ pole pig
> power source was reexamined to see if the capacity in the TC primary was
> near the maximum energy transfer point. A turn on of the alternator yielded
> 3 phases of 1.6 volts before the field is energized, where the middle phase
> 2 is selected for the pole pig. As mentioned no amperage is recorded into
> the pole pig primary until the secondary capacitive load of the TC primary
> is added.  With the arc gap separated and the field non- energized a
>  series of amperage conduction and voltage output tests are made. The short
> as mentioned yields 1.35 A of a single phase, and an open circuit value of
> 1.6 volts. When the TC primary  value of 20 nf was added to the pole pig
> secondary its primary amperage went from 0 to .66 A, but the source voltage
> of 1.6 Volts did not decrease its value to half, which is what a purely
> resistive load should do by the premises of the maximum energy transfer
> theorem, where it is assumed that  having reached half of the short value of
> conduction will also reduce the source voltage by half. Instead what happens
> is that the stator voltage is increased by one third to 2.2 volts. So
> initially measuring things on the high voltage end for these circumstances,
> and also considering that since such low voltages are being employed
> non-linearities of voltage transformation may exist since this is the very
> low end of the saturation curve of the transformer, but nevertheless the
> first
>  recording of output voltages showed 123.5 volts without the capacity
> attached and 184 volts when it is attached. Now all these measurements and
> comparisons of ratios seem to become distorted from their initially measured
> values at this lowest possible level of measurement conducted with an
> un-energized field, and these differences can be shown in comparison at real
> operation with an energized field with a 10 Amp  pole pig primary
> consumption, and after the TC had been redesigned to employ the nearest
> correct resonant secondary capacity to be determined by these unenergized
> field tests to be noted next. In that case after the TC primary was
> redesigned and the correct C value used, it was noted that by sending a
> third of an amp through the field, this created three phases of 7.1 volts
> with no load attached, but then attaching the TC primary to the pole pig
> secondary resulted in the primary stator voltage now going up 60 % to 11.5
> volts. Thus at only a 7
>  volt unloaded stator it becomes 11.5 volts conducting 10 amps into the
> pole pig primary, and the alternator can be pressed to do triple this duty
> for short periods of time, sending near 30 amps into the pole pig primary.
>     Now getting back to the un-energized field tests, the next thing to be
> explored was the value of primary amperage consumption once the registered
> level of 184 volts at the pole pig secondary was shorted, and this yielded
> only a 1 amp primary consumption, when in fact a direct short of the stator
> lines connected to the current limited supply of the alternator yielded 1.35
> A. This at first puzzled me so then obviously the next thing to do was to
> try various values of capacity for a pole pig secondary load. The capacities
> being used are a series string of five .1 uf values yeilding 20 nf. Taking
> one out of the string yields 25 nf, two taken out yeilds 33nf, and next a
> value of 50 nf. Note how the adjacent stator phase voltages having no load
> are influenced by phase 2's pole pig primary load.
>
> Un-energized field tests initially yield three phases of 1.6 volts. With 20
> nf  pole pig secondary load the stator voltages and amperages become;
>
> Stator phase 1; 1.6 volts
> Stator phase 2; 2.2 volts yielding .66 A to pole pig primary
> Stator phase 3; 2.0 volts
>
> Using 25 nf phase 2 then outputs .9 A with its stator voltage rising to 2.3
> volts, showing 204 volts at the arc bars.
>
> Using 33 nf;
> 1) 1.5 volts
> 2) 2.8 volts yields 1.55 A primary draw, it has exceeded its short value of
> 1.35A and also yielding 253 volts at arc bars
> 3) 2.5 volts
>
> Using 50 nf; this begins to load down phase 1 which gets reduced to
> 1) 0.7 volts
> 2) 2.6 volts yielding 2.4 A primary draw, a 80 % increase in the alternator
> established current limitation and 262 volts at the arc bars!
> 3) 2.6 volts
> Using 100nf now the demand begins to exceed the supply and the stator
> phases are all reduced to
> 1) 0.7 volts
> 2) 0.5 volts yeilding .68 A primary draw producing 91 volts at secondary,
> showing perhaps another unusual thing where we cannot predict the secondary
>  voltage output merely by the primary amperage draw but must also consider
> the input primary voltage.
> 3) 1.4 volts.
>
> So obviously 50 nf becomes the first convenient value to select and by
> downsizing the primary from the previous NST design, superior arcing and
> power input seems available from the alternator 456 hz pole pig combination
> vs a single 60 hz NST. A higher power stator voltage reading shows that
> sending .8 A through field yields
> 1) 8.8 volts
> 2) 32.6 volts to pole pig primary where if we assume linearity of  the 10
> amp measurement @ 11.5 volts, this becomes a 28 amp draw at 32 volts input
> yeilding 924 watts possible input power vs the noted 112 watts for the NST
> example.
> 3) 29 volts
>
> Note that phase 3's voltage has not yet been severely loaded down, so our
> next piece of work will be to add a TC system to that phase, so that two
> somewhat oppositely phased TC's can be interacted together at their top
> terminals. It now does not seem far off in speculation for a three phase TC
> application with three identical TC's powered by a three phase high voltage
> transformer, which is also at my disposal for these experiments.
>    To close here let us consider the voltage differences available from the
> NST vs pole pig/alternator combo. We might assume that 32 volts input
> becomes 62 fold through the pole pig transformer becomes near 2000 volts so
> the ratio to 15,000 volts would be 13 %.  But then again this amount of
> energy transfers 7.6 times faster at 456 hz and  multiplying .13 by 7.6
> yeilds the original amount.  But since the V term is exponential it would
> seem that 60 hz @ 15,000 volts should have more energy transfer, however it
> may be true that since the 20 nf value being used is over four times the
> rated current limitation of the NST secondary, that it may only charge those
> caps to 1/4 of its 15,000 voltage rating? And additionally the value of
> capacity used for the alternator pole pig combination is 2.5 times higher at
> 50 nf, which the NST may not even be able to fire.  In any case I have made
> my argument that that alternator can outpower the NST, and I will
>  tentatively demonstrate this on the 19th of September, and would
> appreciate any constructive criticism concerning the above power transfer
> analysis. We are also having problems taking pictures from a digital camera,
> so if any one attending the teslathon has some trade secrets here, that
> would be appreciated.
>     All of these things may open new doorways for designing a TC to match
> the output of the bus generators, employing 6 phases as they are a matched
> dual set. An unmagnetized field rotor test there yielded an open circuit
> voltage of 1 volt @ 400 hz, but a whopping 5 amp short draw. These are also
> operational powered by a 5 hp 220 volt single phase motor.  Perhaps by the
> 19th these can also be included in demonstrations.
>
> Sincerely
> Harvey D Norris
> _______________________________________________
> Tesla mailing list
> Tesla@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://www.pupman.com/mailman/listinfo/tesla
>
_______________________________________________
Tesla mailing list
Tesla@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.pupman.com/mailman/listinfo/tesla