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

TC Electrostatics, more possibilities



At 11:25 PM 1/1/97 -0700, Richard Wayne Wall wrote:

>Subscriber: rwall-at-ix-dot-netcom-dot-com Wed Jan  1 21:56:26 1997
>Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1997 17:10:47 -0800
>From: Richard Wayne Wall <rwall-at-ix-dot-netcom-dot-com>
>To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
>Subject: Re: TC Electrostatics (fwd)
>
>[Chip, I have observed some of RH's recent electrostatic TC 
>experiments. They are incredible and reproducible.  Some on the list 
>are resistant to new and different developements in TCs.  That's OK, 
>but nature is the final arbiter.  NT was aware of the electrostatic 
>nature of his coils.  Much of his work at Colorado Springs was devoted 
>to electrostatics.  This post may be controversial to some, but I must 
>hold my ground.  There will be a lot of new work coming out in the next 
>few months.  As a consequence sparks will be bigger and better in the 
>long run.  Thanks for your consideration.  RWW]  
>
>
>
>
>1/1/96
>
>Bert wrote: 
>
>snip
> 
>>> If we load the TC with power then decrease secondary capacitance at 
>>>the right time then terminal voltage and arcs will increase 
>>>dramatically.  Perhaps switching a series capacitor in the TC base 
>>>circuit in and out at the critical time.  Timing in changing 
>>>(decreasing) the capacity becomes a feed back challenge that most EEs 
>>>should be able to solve.  
>
>>>Would this work also by increasing primary capacitance thus 
>>>increasing power for a fixed primary voltage?
>>> 
>>> RWW
>
>>Richard, Alfred, and all,
>
>snip
>
>>Richard, trying to change Cs "on the fly", although conceptually
>>correct, would be virtually impossible due to the combination of high
>>voltages and rapid switching required.
> 
>Actually, voltages at the secondary base are quite low and switching at 
>100-200 kHz is not terribly difficult electronically.
>
>>Fortunately we don't need to do this - there are easier ways! Merely 
>>increasing primary capacitance, gap breakdown voltage, reducing 
>>secondary capacitance, or improving transfer efficiency will all 
>>increase output voltage, as long as the overall system is retuned 
>>appropriately. 
>
>snip
>
>>Note that, as Alfred suggests, exactly HOW we transfer this energy 
>>does not really matter! A Tesla coil simply does it 
>>electromagnetically.
>
>Alfred suggests nothing of the kind.  Please reread what he wrote.  
>Your last last statement is also incorrect.  The TC is an electrical 
>hybrid.  It translates EM energy into electrostatic energy.  Your above 
>suggestions are all based on electromagnetic concepts.  They are valid, 
>but we have about pushed the TC EM envelope about as far as possible.  
>Alfred, in turn, suggests an electrostatic enhancement of TC terminal 
>potential.
>
>Recent experimentation by RH leaves no doubt that TCs produce large 
>amounts of electrostatic potential and are capable of charging distant 
>objects with electrostatic energy.  These TC experiments are 
>reproducible by anyone on this list.  I have personally observed these 
>experiments.    
>
>snip
>
>> Trying to maximize output voltage is not the whole story. 
>
>No, but a major part of the story is maximizing TC electrostatic 
>potential.  There is a major difference between TC EM output voltage 
>and electrostatic voltage.  They are two distinct types of electricity. 
>They use different units.  They may exist separately or both together 
>in the same circuit.  They do not mix or interfer with each other.  
>They do not superpose or phase cancel.  They are only related through 
>basic charge.  They may only be interconverted by a "translator".  TCs 
>are excellent examples of translators.
>
>High TC terminal electrostatic potential paves the way for big sparks.
>
>RWW 
>
>


I decided is was best not to snip any of the above in the interest of
maintaining an important piece of continuity on this subject.

We all use toroids to shape the electrical fields around the tops of our
coils.  Except for the problem of field shaping, a sphere is better at
storing charge.  It is becoming obvious that electrostatics and charge
storage has been a sorely overlooked part of TC operation.

There may be a way to increase the storage capacity of a toroid or other
discharge capacitance without having to build excessively massive tops; and
the way was paved by none other than NT himself!

Nikola Tesla had developed a unique electrostatic storage device which was
used on his particle beam weapon (some of you may have a copy of NT's
description of this device which was presented at one of the Colorado
Springs Tesla Symposiums several years ago). The best way to describe the
device is a bullet shaped electrode inside a vacuum jar with one wire
electrode coming out which would connect to your toroid.  You would need to
construct many of these.

Playing with the formulae and values presented in this paper, I estimate
that using these devices increases the total charge storage capacity of a
sphere or toriod by a factor of at least ten times!  I know of no one who
has experimented with duplicating these devices.  Richard Hull is at a
perfect point in his research to look into whether the device does in fact
work, and whether it increases charge storage in TC use.  I know I'd like to
do something to reduce the size of my toroids, five feet in diameter and
definitely getting bigger!

Richard, I suspect you already have a copy of the Symposium paper, but if
you don't, and you are interested, I'll immediately send you a copy.


Bert Pool
nikki-at-fastlane-dot-net