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

Re: A Puzzle




From: 	Malcolm Watts[SMTP:MALCOLM-at-directorate.wnp.ac.nz]
Sent: 	Friday, September 05, 1997 1:24 AM
To: 	tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
Subject: 	Re: A Puzzle

Hello All,
           DR RESONANCE wrote:

> From:   DR.RESONANCE[SMTP:DR.RESONANCE-at-next-wave-dot-net]
> Sent:   Wednesday, September 03, 1997 11:36 AM
> To:     Tesla List
> Subject:    Re: A Puzzle
> 
> Malcolm:
> 
> I agree --- larger the resonator the better.  There is a 20-25% gain going
> from 3-4 inch dia to 6-10 inch dia resonators.  This also scales up.  Ed
> Wingate's 24 inch dia. resonator works about 20% better than one of our
> standard 18 in dia resonators.  The larger resonators also seem to generate
> a lot less standing waves kicking back into the pri side of the circuit. 
> Think big!!!
> 
> DR.RESONANCE-at-next-wave-dot-net

It is almost axiomatic that a large resonator is going to be running 
at a lower frequency as well. Cdistr scales with coil size. As well
as that, wire size can be very large indeed which certainly makes Q 
scale with size depending somewhat on design. It would be most 
interesting to see whether the generally lower frequency is a factor 
in all this. My experience with the mini-coils suggest it might be. 
The thing I have been thinking is that the time it takes to establish 
an attached arc is not all that fast and spark gap figures are not 
greatly applicable to long sparks so book theory on gap speeds goes 
out the window. Witness the time it takes to establish a lightning 
channel for example. *If* the attachment is that slow to happen, 
perhaps a resonator sufficiently low in frequency (i.e. a large one) 
can add to the arc feed _directly_ by travelling wave rather than 
just relying on top capacitance for arc current. In such a case, the 
_full_ system capacitance is available as an on-tap feed rather than 
just Ctop.

Just thinkin' out loud (yet again),
Malcolm