*To*: "Antonio Queiroz" <acmdequeiroz@xxxxxxxxx>, <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>*Subject*: Re: [TCML] Wrong theory spreading*From*: "Udo Lenz" <udo_lenz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>*Date*: Mon, 9 Dec 2019 15:45:44 +0100*Delivered-to*: teslaarchive@xxxxxxxxxx*Delivered-to*: tesla@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx*Dkim-signature*: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=compuserve.com; s=a2048; t=1575902980; bh=9rr2tnpP4iNhZgH2FHEvRMVg+4nfK0zKCcoLx5ky4fs=; h=From:To:References:Subject:Date:From:Subject; b=EmVtpITm9wF2h5jPWMGeHDWgal39Eb4ygZLg2VvfG99Dams9deWjLLQXFMJikXkW9bd7lCyclmBKYPq7uVQnpYuxkLxCx+nkl6O+PPDV2noGyLJzqQH9DwVBpnRRvffRxqpR0qizsNIIpth7oHzmLCmhMobzx6OPDZBjxoy6CEc7sAH8gUCTZtc2EDTRRflQ3GRaYGhFoCmHmVuXa3YwpAvRBPthb1f1+ZB+KlYK94kTB5Aju5X+2vhhh/KMfbo0KmtWSJxHhpNMX/XOZAmeHBqf4f+Dt6VZEIC9fzLp+9E71FF4DsvGZ64mlWSHmJSKWlyAuaPg0NKNaycZYjF5Dg==*List-archive*: <https://www.pupman.com/pipermail/tesla/>*List-help*: <mailto:tesla-request@tedward.pupman.com?subject=help>*List-id*: Tesla Coil Mailing List <tesla.tedward.pupman.com>*List-post*: <mailto:tesla@tedward.pupman.com>*List-subscribe*: <https://www.pupman.com/mailman/listinfo/tesla>, <mailto:tesla-request@tedward.pupman.com?subject=subscribe>*List-unsubscribe*: <https://www.pupman.com/mailman/options/tesla>, <mailto:tesla-request@tedward.pupman.com?subject=unsubscribe>*References*: <20191206230351.6CE951AE0076@tedward.pupman.com> <48c77dbe-ac19-f880-5630-e0932a19a7b2@gmail.com>*Reply-to*: Tesla Coil Mailing List <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>*Sender*: "Tesla" <tesla-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx>

Antonio wrote:

...Looking at the history of editions it'spossible to find that by 12 March 2017 someone edited the text sayingthat the secondary resonance frequency was 1/(2 pi sqrt((1-k^2)L2 C2).This is true if the primary coil is kept in the circuit andshort-circuited, but the correct relation continues to be L1 C1=L2 C2.The incorrect tuning relation was added too.

The german website Wikipedia is referencing, is mostly about SSTCs. A useful figure of merit is the power transferred to the secondary for a given input current. The input current is a mixture of a resistive and a reactive part, the latter usually being much larger. The resistive part is the one transferring power into the coil and that part peaks at the secondary resonance frequency. By choosing a frequency somewhat beside the resonance, it is possible to reduce the reactive part of the current, but the optimum amount of detuning depends not only on the coupling, but also on the loading of the secondary. A much better way to reduce the reactive part is by putting a cap in series on the input side, such as in a DRSSTC. In this case the preferred input frequency is the secondary resonance frequency and the necessary cap for this must be chosen with L1*C1=L2*C2. Sadly this configuration has stability issues. Stable operation can be obtained at the pole frequencies. There L1*C1=L2*C2 might not be the best choice, but that is a topic way outside the Wiki article. For an SGTC, L1*C1=L2*C2 is necessary for a complete transfer of primary energy to the secondary. The Wikipedia entry defintely needs a correction. Udo _______________________________________________ Tesla mailing list Tesla@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://www.pupman.com/mailman/listinfo/tesla

**Follow-Ups**:**Re: [TCML] Wrong theory spreading***From:*Antonio Queiroz

**References**:**Re: [TCML] Wrong theory spreading***From:*Jay Howson

**Re: [TCML] Wrong theory spreading***From:*Antonio Queiroz

- Prev by Date:
**[TCML] capacitors as ballast Re: Sale: more items listed on ebay, capacitors,** - Next by Date:
**Re: [TCML] Eastern Voltage Research VTTC Staccato Controller - puzzled on "burst" output** - Previous by thread:
**Re: [TCML] Wrong theory spreading** - Next by thread:
**Re: [TCML] Wrong theory spreading** - Index(es):