Re: Skeleton secondary?

["Tesla list" <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>]

Original poster: "Black Moon by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>" <black_moons-at-hotmail-dot-com>








>From: "Tesla list" <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>
>To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
>Subject: Skeleton secondary?
>Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2002 10:49:16 -0700
>
>Original poster: "Jolyon Vater Cox by way of Terry Fritz 
><twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>" <jolyon-at-vatercox.freeserve.co.uk>
>
>Dear List,
>
>Having noted that most secondaries are wound on solid tube formers, are 
>there advantages in winding a secondary on on a "skeleton" former (i.e. 
>circle of several insulating supports or tubes) for instance to minimise 
>self-capacitance?

self capacitance isent all that bad as I understand it, and I think you'd 
have insulation disantanges, remember nowdays good coils can produce arcs 
longer then the secondary is tall, and should be sealed at both ends


>Moreover would there be an even greater advantage in employing a "Lorenz" 
>type secondary (where the wire is wound between  supporting poles
>numbered 1 to 8 so the wire passes over 1 under 2 and 3 ,over 4, under 5 
>and 6, over 7 and so forth so that each complete turn is see end-on as an 
>8-pointed star with the wire having been wound over all eight poles)
>from the capacitance-reduction point of view?
... ewww....
havent a clue..
tho it might be intresting to make a compleat turn around each one.. to 
incress the turn count while keeping size small and ability to use wider 
wire.. tho you'd still need a center insulator and a shitload of varnish. 
or id presume you'd get alot of strikes down the inside and I don't think 
that would be good.


>Jolyon.