[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: Top Load Optimizing - Q?
Hi Jim,
> Original Poster: "Jim Firanzi" <teslacoiler@mad.scientist.com>
>
> In a well-written article, Rodney posted the following:
>
> "The main concept with top-load design is matching it to the secondary coil.
> With capacitive/reactive tuned circuits, the way to obtain zero impedance is
> to match your capacitive reactance with the inductive reactance." The
> complete article may be viewed here:
>
> http://www.geocities.com/ResearchTriangle/Campus/9367/tuning.html
>
> He goes on to calculate capacitive reactance of the torroid top load, and
> states that the goal is to design your top load so that this capacitive
> reactance cancells out the native inductive reactance of the secondary. He
> goes on to make the following statement:
A comment: Personally that "cancellation" bit rubs the wrong way
with me. Why? They only cancel at one frequency and that
frequency can be anything below the self-resonant frequnecy that
you choose. Calculating the capacitance (or reactance at some
particular frequency) of a topload as if it were isolated and then
expecting that figure to match reality when it is mounted on a coil is
utterly futile according to experiment. Even reason cannot sustain
that view.
> "The secondary coil is best described as an air-core inductor ? for that
> matter, any coil of wire is known as an inductor. As capacitors have
> capacitive reactance, inductors have *inductive* reactance. The formula for
> calculating the inductive reactance of your secondary coil is X(L) = 2 * Pi
> * F * L ..."
It is a resonant structure in its own right (i.e. it does possess a self
capacitance). In calling a coil an inductor one is generally
describing its properties way below its self-resonant frequency.
> My question is this: Programs like Wintesla calculate both the inductive
> reactance of a secondary AS WELL AS the native capacitance of that
> secondary. Should I attempt to design my coil such that total capacitive
> reactance (secondary + toroid) cancells out the inductive reactance? Or do
> we ignore the native capacitance of the secondary?
You can't - it's there to stay unfortunately.
Regards,
Malcolm
> It's not the size of the spark, it's the frequency.
> ______________________________________________
> FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com
> Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup
>
>