[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: input power?
-
To: tesla-at-grendel.objinc-dot-com
-
Subject: Re: input power?
-
From: "Malcolm Watts" <MALCOLM-at-directorate.wnp.ac.nz>
-
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 1996 10:51:54 +1200
-
>Received: from rata.vuw.ac.nz (root-at-rata.vuw.ac.nz [130.195.2.11]) by uucp-1.csn-dot-net (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id OAA03822 for <tesla-at-grendel.objinc-dot-com>; Sun, 25 Feb 1996 14:50:45 -0700
On this subject...
> I agree that coil length as a comparison to spark is wrong too.Since I've
> always thought of the output in terms of input power (read efficiency at
> processing input power) maybe we should be thinking about what amount of
> power is REALLY reaching the secondary and relate this to spark length.
Well if at the k a system is set to it takes 4 primary reversals (read
gap fires) to empty the primary, then that is 4 losses to be
subtracted from the initial capacitor energy that will end up in the
secondary.
> Has anyone considered if the K factor should be dialed into this?The way
> I understand it the K factor describes how much power is being coupled
> to the secondary where .15 is really 15%.
k determines how many cycles it takes for the energy to be
transferred. The larger the value of k, the fewer cycles (read less
time) it takes to effect the transfer. Mark Barton and Ed Harris have
both given references recently to an excellent paper on this subject.
I think the guy's name was "Abramans" or something like it.
Malcolm